Opinion ID: 2635992
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Procedural Background; Summary Judgment

Text: Because plaintiff appealed from the trial court's order granting defendant summary judgment, we independently examine the record in order to determine whether triable issues of fact exist to reinstate the action. ( Saelzler v. Advanced Group 400 (2001) 25 Cal.4th 763, 767, 107 Cal.Rptr.2d 617, 23 P.3d 1143.) In this action, therefore, we must determine whether defendant has shown that plaintiff has not established a prima facie case of negligence or strict liability, a showing that would forecast the inevitability of a nonsuit in defendant's favor. ( Id. at p. 768, 107 Cal.Rptr.2d 617, 23 P.3d 1143.) If so, then under such circumstances the trial court was well justified in awarding summary judgment to avoid a useless trial. (Ibid.) In performing our de novo review, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff as the losing party. (Ibid.) In this case, we liberally construe plaintiffs evidentiary submissions and strictly scrutinize defendant's own evidence, in order to resolve any evidentiary doubts or ambiguities in plaintiffs favor. (Ibid.)