What happens when a party fails to properly controvert facts in summary judgment opposition? Evans v. Huber Explained

In Evans v. Huber, the Utah Court of Appeals reinforced the critical importance of properly controverting facts when opposing summary judgment. This case serves as a cautionary tale for practitioners about the specific evidentiary requirements under Rule 7 and Rule 56 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.

Background and Facts

Evans and Huber were the sole members of Drilling Resources, LLC. In June 2008, they agreed to dissolve the company and deposit $50,000 into escrow pending an accounting. Evans later sued, claiming he did not receive proper distributions and alleging breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and other claims. Defendants moved for summary judgment, supporting their motion with a detailed accounting report from certified public accountant Rodney Savage.

Key Legal Issues

The central issue was whether Evans properly controverted defendants’ statement of facts under Rule 7(c)(3)(B), which requires “an explanation of the grounds for any dispute, supported by citation to relevant materials, such as affidavits or discovery materials.” All of Evans’s claims required proof of damages as either an element of the claim or for monetary relief.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court applied the correctness standard to the trial court’s summary judgment ruling. Evans failed to provide any witness affidavits or discovery materials to support his opposition, instead relying on allegations in his complaint and promises that he would “be able to question and refute” the expert’s statements at trial. Under Rule 7(c)(3)(A), uncontroverted facts are “deemed admitted for the purpose of summary judgment.” The court held that without specific evidence controverting the accounting, Evans could not establish damages.

Practice Implications

This decision emphasizes that parties cannot survive summary judgment by merely restating pleading allegations or promising future evidence. Once the moving party presents evidence supporting their position, the non-moving party must respond with specific factual support through affidavits, depositions, or other discovery materials. Practitioners should ensure expert witnesses are designated before discovery closes and should attach supporting affidavits when opposing summary judgment motions.