Draft Motion For Summary Judgment

---
name: draft-motion-for-summary-judgment
task_id: litigation-dispute-resolution/draft-motion-for-summary-judgment
description: Drafting a summary judgment motion in a failed enterprise software implementation dispute requires constructing a statement of undisputed material facts from the record evidence and matching each undisputed fact to the elements of breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, and negligent misrepresentation, with both the motion brief and the statement of undisputed material facts as separate required outputs.
activates_for: [planner, solver, checker]
---

# Skill: Draft Motion for Summary Judgment — Breach of Contract, Fraudulent Inducement, and Negligent Misrepresentation in Failed ERP Implementation

## 1. Subject-matter triage
- Identify the governing procedural rule set before drafting: Rule 56, the applicable local summary-judgment rule, and any standing order governing statement formatting, page limits, and citation style.
- Treat the record as the source of truth. Separate pre-contract representations, contract terms, implementation performance, acceptance/testing evidence, notice and cure communications, and damages proof.
- If the contract contains forum, arbitration, choice-of-law, limitation-of-liability, warranty disclaimer, or consequential-damages provisions, flag them early because they may control the motion’s strongest arguments.
- If the record spans multiple projects, modules, releases, phases, or statement periods, enumerate them first and analyze each separately rather than collapsing them into a single implementation narrative.

## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting
- Drafting the motion without a separately drafted statement of undisputed material facts, or letting the brief substitute for the fact statement.
- Asserting “undisputed” facts without tying each one to specific record support.
- Using a single document or witness declaration as the entire factual foundation instead of building from the full evidentiary record.
- Blending fraudulent inducement and negligent misrepresentation into one theory, which obscures the distinct mental-state and reliance requirements.
- Omitting contract defenses that may defeat or narrow recovery, especially limitation-of-liability, disclaimer, exclusion of consequential damages, no-reliance, integration, or exclusive-remedy clauses.
- Stating legal conclusions without identifying the rule, element, or controlling authority that makes the conclusion work.
- Drafting the brief as a general narrative instead of a paragraph-cited argument keyed to the numbered facts.

## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply
- Rule 56 controls summary judgment: the movant must show no genuine dispute of material fact and entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.
- The local summary-judgment rule may require a numbered statement of facts with pinpoint record citations and may deem unsupported denials admitted.
- For breach of contract, analyze: valid contract, performance or excuse, breach, and damages.
- For fraudulent inducement, analyze: material misrepresentation or omission, falsity, knowledge or reckless disregard, intent to induce, actual and reasonable reliance, and resulting damages.
- For negligent misrepresentation, analyze: false information supplied without reasonable care, intent or expectation that it be relied on, actual and reasonable reliance, and damages.
- If the jurisdiction recognizes them, address common defenses such as integration, no-reliance, parol evidence, lack of justifiable reliance, economic-loss doctrine, and contractual damage caps.
- In commercial software disputes, pre-contract sales materials and implementation communications often matter, but the motion must distinguish actionable misrepresentations from puffery, predictions, or future promises unless the governing law treats them differently.
- Cite every legal proposition with the controlling authority used in the case: the rule, statute, leading case, or other governing source.

## 4. Analytical scaffolds
- Start with the contract: identify scope, service standards, acceptance criteria, milestones, change-control mechanics, termination rights, limitation language, and damages language.
- Build the fact statement chronologically unless the motion is better organized by claim element; either way, keep each fact concise, supportable, and material.
- For each numbered fact, ask: what document or testimony proves it, which legal element does it support, and whether the same fact also supports a defense or limitation.
- Separate pre-contract statements from contractual promises. Do not let later performance failures substitute for proof of earlier inducement.
- For breach, align contract terms to conduct and isolate the specific obligations not met.
- For fraud and negligent misrepresentation, identify the particular statement, who made it, when, to whom, and why the statement was material.
- Assess reliance carefully. If the plaintiff had access to contrary information, testing results, or integration language, address why reliance remains reasonable or why the defense fails.
- Assess damages against the contract’s remedial provisions before drafting the prayer for relief.
- Draft the brief in claim-by-claim, element-by-element form, with each paragraph pointing back to the numbered facts and specific exhibits.
- If multiple defendants, multiple projects, multiple contracts, or multiple time periods are involved, analyze each separately and state clearly when a fact or argument applies to only one of them.

## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships
- Distinguish the order of events: marketing and diligence, contracting, implementation, testing, notice, cure, termination, and post-termination damages.
- Track which statements are pre-signing representations and which are post-signing performance statements; the legal consequences differ.
- Track which contract terms are operative at each stage, especially amendments, change orders, statements of work, acceptance reports, and later waivers.
- If the record includes recurring status updates or periodic invoices, organize them by period so the court can see progression from promise to nonperformance.
- If the source materials involve multiple affiliated entities or counterparties, identify the exact actor tied to each representation, obligation, and payment stream before drawing any inference.

## 6. Output structure conventions
- Produce two separate Word-ready documents: the motion and the statement of undisputed facts.
- The motion should use a conventional brief structure: caption if available, introduction, summary of argument, legal standard, argument organized by claim, and conclusion with requested relief.
- The statement of undisputed facts should use numbered paragraphs, one fact per paragraph where possible, each with a direct record citation.
- Keep citations close to the proposition they support; avoid long uncited factual runs.
- Use the fact statement to prove the motion, not to narrate background that does not advance an element or defense.
- In the motion, cite the numbered facts by paragraph number; in the fact statement, cite the underlying record with enough specificity to verify each proposition.
- When a contract clause may limit damages, address it in the body of the argument and, if needed, in a separate damages subsection.
- Before finalizing, confirm both filenames match the instruction exactly and that each file contains operative content, not a summary of what should be drafted.