Opinion ID: 202073
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: standard of review

Text: 17 We review de novo the district court's decision to grant summary judgment. Roldan-Plumey, 115 F.3d at 61. However, we review the district court's decision to exclude an exhibit from evidence only for abuse of discretion. [P]rior to turning to its de novo summary judgment examination, the Court should review the district court's evidentiary rulings made as part of its decision on summary judgment for abuse of discretion. Alternative Sys. Concepts, Inc. v. Synopsys, Inc., 374 F.3d 23, 31 (1st Cir.2004) (citing Schubert v. Nissan Motor Corp., 148 F.3d 25, 29 (1st Cir.1998)). [A] trial court should have as much leeway in dealing with those [evidentiary] matters at the summary judgment stage as at trial. Id. at 31-32. 18 The phrase abuse of discretion 19 sounds worse than it really is. All it need mean is that, when judicial action is taken in a discretionary matter, such action cannot be set aside by a reviewing court unless it has a definite and firm conviction that the court below committed a clear error of judgment in the conclusion it reached upon a weighing of the relevant factors. 20 Schubert, 148 F.3d at 30 (quotation omitted). A court of appeals ordinarily will not find an abuse of discretion unless perscrutation of the record provides strong evidence that the trial judge indulged in a serious lapse in judgment. Texaco P.R., Inc. v. Dep't of Consumer Affairs, 60 F.3d 867, 875 (1st Cir.1995).