Cited by

(“It follows that we will rarely review the court of appeals’ discretionary refusal to accept jurisdiction of a special action challenging the denial of a motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment.”); (“We acknowledge that special action relief from the denial of summary judgment is almost always inappropriate.”); (“[B]ecause relief by special action is largely discretionary, we follow a general policy of declining jurisdiction when relief by sp

v. Petta, (non-movants’ conclusory statements, “unsupported by any documentary evidence,” were speculative); (self-serving assertions lacking factual support are insufficient to defeat summary judgment).

602 (“A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.”); (“[A]ffidavits that only set forth ultimate facts or conclusions of law can neither support nor defeat a motion for summary judgment.” (citation omitted)); 294 (1995) (affirming trial court’s denial of relief to criminal defendant who sought post-conviction relief based o

12(b)(7); ¶ 5 (App. 2011) (“[A]n appeal inadequately remedies a trial court’s improperly requiring a defense in a matter where it has no jurisdiction[.]”) (-52, ¶ 5 (App. 1998)); (“But we also acknowledge that in the rare extraordinary case, special action relief may be the only way to avoid the very harms a particular defense [(statute of limitations)] was intended to prevent.”); Samaritan Health Sys.

(noting that “delicate policy decisions” often involve “weighing, balancing, and policy making that .

Florez v. 7 (citation omitted).

ing that statements in Husband’s own declarations on the point were “self-serving” 7 SEMILIA v. SEMILIA, et al. Decision of the Court and “conclusory.” 4 Affidavits “that only set forth ultimate facts or conclusions of law can neither support nor defeat a motion for summary judgment.” (noting also that self-serving assertions lacking factual support are not enough to defeat summary judgment).

(holding psychologist’s affidavit insufficient to withstand summary judgment on statute of limitations grounds because, when affidavit stated, in conclusory terms, that plaintiff was of “unsound mind” without identifying “facts to 8 TRAILHEAD

¶ 28 (App. 1998) (stating affidavits that "provide mere conclusory statements" are insufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment); ("[A]ffidavits that only set forth ultimate facts or conclusions of law can neither support nor defeat a motion for summary judgment.").

(defining as someone “unable to manage his affairs or to understand his legal rights or liabilities”).

(“Self-serving assertions without factual support in the record will not defeat a motion for summary judgment.”).

P. 56(e); (“[A]ffidavits that only set forth ultimate facts or conclusions of law can neither support nor defeat a motion for summary judgment.”).

And “[s]elf-serving assertions without factual support in the record will not defeat a motion for summary judgment.” –27 (1996) (quoting Jones v. Merchants Nat’l Bank & Tr.

2 because the Gruvers’ equine expert offered more than speculation, ultimate facts or conclusions of law.

“[A]ffidavits that only set forth ultimate facts or conclusions of law can neither support nor defeat a motion for summary judgment.” (citations omitted).

“But affidavits that only set forth ultimate facts or conclusions of law can neither support nor defeat a motion for summary judgment.” –27 (1996) (collecting cases).

“An expert affidavit opposing a motion for summary judgment must set forth ‘specific facts’ to support an opinion.” see also Ariz. R. Civ.

P. 56(e); –27 (1996) (conclusory affidavits “can neither support nor defeat a motion for summary judgment”); Orme Sch., 166 Ariz. at 310; (“[I]f the party against whom a motion for a summary judgment is directed wants to stay in court he cannot withhold an appropriate showing until

(“Self-serving assertions without factual support in the record will not defeat a motion for summary judgment.”) (citation omitted).

("Self-serving assertions without factual support in the record will not defeat a motion for summary judgment.") (citation omitted).