Issue: Under what circumstances should a court conclude that a motion for summary judgment has been brought prematurely to allow gathering of additional discovery in the Third Circuit?
| Area of Law: | Litigation & Procedure |
| Keywords: | Summary judgment; Delay action for additional discovery |
| Jurisdiction: | Federal |
| Cited Cases: | 945 F.2d 1260; 885 F.2d 66; 30 F.3d 424 |
| Cited Statutes: | Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) |
| Date: | 02/01/2001 |
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) gives a court discretion to delay action on a motion for summary judgment. The rule provides in full:
Should it appear from the affidavits of a party opposing the motion that the party cannot for reasons stated present by affidavit facts essential to justify the party’s opposition, the court may refuse the application for judgment or may order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or depositions to be taken or discovery to be had or may make such other order as is just.
In the Third Circuit, whether a Rule 56(f) motion should be granted "depends, in part, on ‘what particular information is sought; how, if uncovered, it would preclude summary judgment; and why it has not been previously obtained.”’ See Contractors Assoc. v. City of Philadelphia, 945 F.2d 1260, 1266 (3d Cir. 1991) (quoting Lunderstadt v. Colafella, 885 F.2d 66, 71 (3d Cir.1989)). Moreover, where relevant information sought is in the hands of the moving party, "a court should grant a Rule 56(f) motion almost as a matter of course unless the information is otherwise available to the non-movant." Contractors Assoc., 945 F.2d at 1267; see also San Filippo v. Bongiovanni, 30 F.3d 424, 432 (3d Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1082, 115 S. Ct. 735, 130 L.Ed.2d 638 (1995) (reversing grant of summary judgment where non-movant was not permitted to conduct discovery). See Contractors Assoc., 945 F.2d […]