Two criteria of review govern this instance. First, we review the вЂњdistrict court’s evidentiary rulings at the summary judgment stage just for punishment of discernment.вЂќ Wright v. Farouk Sys., Inc., 701 F.3d 907, 910 (11th Cir. 2012). Under this standard, вЂњwe must affirm unless we discover that the region court has made a definite error of judgment, or has used the incorrect appropriate standard.вЂќ Knight ex rel. Kerr v. Miami-Dade Cty., 856 F.3d 795, 808 (11th Cir. 2017) (interior quote marks omitted).
Second, we review the region court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, using the exact exact same standards that are legal the region court. Information. Sys. & Networks Corp. v. City of Atlanta, 281 F.3d 1220, 1224 (11th Cir. 2002). Summary judgment is acceptable вЂњif the movant indicates that there’s absolutely no genuine dispute as to virtually any product reality therefore the movant is eligible for judgment being a matter of legislation.вЂќ Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The burden shifts into the nonmoving celebration to exhibit that specific facts occur that raise an authentic problem for test.вЂњOnce the movant acceptably supports its movementвЂќ Dietz v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 598 F.3d 812, 815 (11th Cir. 2010). If the non-movant’s proof is вЂњnot somewhat probative,вЂќ summary judgment is suitable. Read More