Opinion ID: 2584330
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Schug's Claims Are Unsupportable As A Matter Of Law.

Text: Schug alleges Moore committed fraud, deception, bribery, and conspiracy before and during the personal injury trial. His unsupported allegations of wrongdoing do not rise to the level of disputed issues of material fact unless the record ... contain[s] at least some objective evidence establishing facts capable of supporting an inference of wrongdoing. [11] [C]onclusory statements describing [a party's] subjective impressions do not raise disputed questions of material fact. [12] Schug failed to carry his burden to defeat Moore's motion for summary judgment. He offered no objective evidence establishing facts capable of supporting an inference that Moore engaged in wrongdoing before or during the 2006 trial. At best, his allegations against Moore appear to be the product of confusion about her role as a defense attorney. Because Schug failed to offer admissible evidence that could give rise to an inference of a conspiracy or other wrongful conduct by Moore, we affirm the trial court's order granting summary judgment in Moore's favor.