Cited by

Brookover v. Roberts Enterprises, Inc., ¶ 19 (App. 2007).

6 HOLM et al. v. GATEWAY et al. Decision of the Court it addressed the motion.7 Brookover v. Roberts Enter’s, Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007).

(recognizing that merely because an accident is rare does 9 BOLAND v. DISCOUNT TIRE, et al. Decision of the Court not lead to the application of res ipsa loquitur.); cf. Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 21 (App. 2007) (finding that plaintiffs failed to show, without expert testimony or an assumption of common knowledge, that their automobile collision with a cow in open range territory was the type of accident that would not occur absent negligence by the owner of the cow).

Servs., Inc., (“Arguments not made in the trial court cannot be asserted for the first time on appeal.”); Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007) (“We review the decision on the record made in the trial court, considering only the evidence presented to the trial court when it addressed the motion.”); (party cannot raise new theories on appeal to seek reversal of summary judgment).

In doing so, we determine “whether any genuine issues of material fact exist.” Brookover v. Roberts Enter., Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007); ¶ 14 (App. 2006).

See, ¶ 2 (2014); Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007).

See, e.g., Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., n.2, ¶ 17 (App. 2007).

This court reviews the entry of summary judgment de novo, to determine “whether any genuine issues of material fact exist,” Brookover v. Roberts Enter., Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007), and will affirm summary judgment if it is correct for any reason

¶ 13 (App. 2010).1 We consider “only the evidence presented to the trial court when it addressed the motion.” Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007).

This court reviews the entry of summary judgment de novo, to determine “whether any genuine issues of material fact exist,” Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007), and will affirm if summary judgment is correct for any reason

This court reviews the entry of summary judgment de novo, to determine “whether any genuine issues of material fact exist,” Brookover v. Roberts Enter., Inc., , 55 ¶ 8, and will affirm the entry of summary judgment if it is correct for any reason

This court reviews the entry of summary judgment de novo, to determine “whether any genuine issues of material fact exist,” Brookover v. Roberts Enter., Inc., ¶ 8 (App. 2007), and will affirm the entry of summary judgment if it is correct for any reason

See Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., n.1, ¶ 16, n.1 (App. 2007) (stating we only consider evidence before the trial court when it was considering its initial ruling); Cella Barr Assocs., n.1, n.1 (App. 1994) (stating we only consider evidence presented to the trial court); GM

Brookover v. Roberts Enter., Inc., ¶ 8, (internal citations omitted).

See Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8

See Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8, (“We review the decision 7 APREA II v. HAFTER, et al. Decision of the Court on the record made in the trial court, considering only the evidence presented to the trial court when it addres

Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8

Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8

See Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., n.1, ¶ 16, n.1 (App. 2007).

Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8

A. ¶ 9 We review a summary judgment de novo to determine “whether any genuine issues of material fact exist and whether the trial court properly applied the law.” Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8 , ( ¶ 4 , ).

¶ 77 Viewing the evidence and reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to Augusta Ranch, Brookover v. Roberts Enterprises, Inc., ¶ 8 , we conclude the evidence presented on summary judgment was insufficient for a jury to find by clear and convincing evidence that SWC, Cal Bank and W.M.

Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8

Brookover v. Roberts Enters., Inc., ¶ 8 , GM Dev.