Opinion ID: 2338285
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: A. Summary Judgment Standard

Text: On appeal, we review the grant of a motion for summary judgment de novo, relying on the same standard that was used by the trial court. Hollins v. Fedreal Nat. Mortg. Ass'n, 760 A.2d 563, 570 (2000). Thus, we must conduct an independent review of the record, assessing it in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and resolving against the moving party any doubts about the existence of a material factual dispute. Id. [10] In order to prevail on a motion for summary judgment, the moving party must show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 56(c); Hollins, supra, 760 A.2d at 570. Once this burden has been met, the nonmoving party has the burden of producing evidence that shows there is sufficient evidence supporting the claimed factual dispute ... to require a jury or judge to resolve the parties' differing versions of the truth at trial. Kitt v. Capital Concerts, Inc., 742 A.2d 856, 859 (D.C.1999) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); accord, Hollins, supra, 760 A.2d at 570. In the event that the nonmoving party fails to counter[] the allegations of the moving party with specific facts, the motion for summary judgment will be granted. Paul v. Howard Univ., 754 A.2d 297, 305 (D.C.2000). [11]