LAW OFFICES OF ANY ATTORNEY
12345 ANY STREET
ANY TOWN, CA 55555
Attorney for Defendants/Cross-Complainants
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
ANY PLAINTIFF, ) CASE NO.
v. ) OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
) SUMMARY JUDGMENT;
ANY DEFENDANTS, ) MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
) AND AUTHORITIES;
Defendants. ) SEPARATE STATEMENT OF
) UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS;
____________________________________) DECLARATION OF ________
AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS )
Cross-Complainant, _________________________ (“Cross-Complainant”), herein
submits its Opposition to Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment.
The Opposition shall be based on this Opposition, the attached Memorandum of Points
and Authorities, the Declaration of Sheldon ________________________and Exhibits attached
thereto, and the Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, concurrently filed and served,
on the complete files and records of this action, and on such other oral and/or documentary
evidence as may be presented at the hearing on the Motion.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
STATEMENT OF FACTS
This case arises out of ________________________________________________.
Put down a brief description of the case, such as breach of contract action, with
Plaintiffs complaint alleges that________________________________________. Cross-
complainant denies all of the allegations of Plaintiffs’ complaint.
Cross-complainant filed and served a Cross-Complaint for Breach of Contract, Fraud and
Declaratory Relief against ______________________________________.
Cross-Defendants then filed their Motion for Summary Judgment contending that
because of the deemed admitted requests for admission against Cross-complainant that Cross-
complainant’s Cross-Complaint has no merit.
Cross-complainant opposes Cross-Defendants Motion on the grounds that there are
triable issues of material fact in that ______________________________________.
Thus there are triable issues of material fact as to who breached the contract, whether Cross-
Defendants committed fraud against Cross-complainant, and as to whether Cross-complainant is
entitled to declaratory relief. Cross-complainant thus contends that the Court should deny Cross-
Defendants Motion and allow all of the claims in this case to be heard on their merits, as the law
Cross-complainant contends that it can show credible evidence of triable issues of
material fact exist for all three causes of action of the Cross-Complaint.
Be sure to modify these paragraphs to suit your individual
situation. Do NOT just use the wording here unless it definitely
applies to your particular situation.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT CAN ONLY BE GRANTED WHEN NO TRIABLE ISSUE
EXISTS AS TO ANY MATERIAL FACT
Case law is clear that Summary Judgment can only be granted when no triable issues of
material fact exist.
Summary judgment may only be granted when no triable issue exists as to any material
fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Villa v. McFerren (1995) 35
Cal. App.4th 733, 741. See also Thatcher v. Lucky Stores, Inc. (2000) 79 Cal.App. 4th 1081,
Summary judgment is proper if, and only if, affidavits in support of motion, strictly
construed, contain facts sufficient to entitle moving party to judgment, and those of opposing
party, liberally construed, fail to show there is material issue of fact. Eott Energy Corp. v.
Storebrand Internat. Ins. Co. (1996) 45 Cal. App.4th 565, review denied.
Summary judgment is appropriate only if facts upon which motion is based are sufficient
to sustain judgment in favor of moving party and if party opposing motion doe