Opinion ID: 186120
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Declaration of Joseph Flores

Text: 12 In its initial decision the district court refused to consider the Declaration of Joseph Flores because it contradicts Mr. Flores' deposition testimony at several relevant points. The court would not allow the Flores to create a ... factual dispute through the submission of a self-serving declaration that contradicts prior deposition testimony. 13 Upon the Flores' motion for reconsideration, however, the district court did consider the Declaration and found it did not contradict any fact material to whether R.C. Tile was the alter ego of R.C. Construction. Rather, the court stated, the Declaration disputed only minor and immaterial issues of fact and did not alter the district court's conclusion that the Trustees were entitled to summary judgment. 14 On review, therefore, this court need not consider the merits of the district court's initial conclusion that the Declaration was a sham affidavit. The appellants' protestation notwithstanding, at the end of the day the district court simply did not ignore Joseph's Declaration in granting summary judgment to the Trustees.