COA Vacates Summary Judgment Where Evidence Differed From, But Issues Of Law Were Same As, Prior SJ Order

In Cail v. Cerwin, (06-304), the COA vacated parts of a summary judgment order due to deja review. In 2004, Judge Titus denied summary judgment as to several of plaintiffs' claims and a defendant's counterclaim. In 2005, Judge Cashwell granted summary judgment on claims as to which Judge Titus had denied summary judgment. The problem -- while the evidence differed by the time Judge Cashwell ruled, some of the legal issues were the same as those upon which Judge Titus had ruled. The COA underscored that only where the legal issues differ between a first motion for summary judgment and a later motion may a trial court entertain and rule on the later motion. Otherwise, you've got a trial court reviewing and potentially overruling another trial court, a job only for the COA & Co.