Page:Jegley v. Picado, 349 Ark. 600 (2002).pdf/1

600 Larry JEGLEY, In His Official Capacity, and On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Elena PICADO, et al.

01-815

Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered July 5, 2002 
 * 1) J.—Summary judgment should only be granted when it is clear that there are no genuine issues of material fact to be litigated, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
 * 2) J.—On review, the appellate court determines if summary judgment was appropriate based on whether the evidentiary items presented by the moving party in support of the motion leave a material fact unanswered.
 * 3) J.—The burden of sustaining the motion for summary judgment is always on the moving party; the appellate court views the evidence in a light most favorable to the party against whom the motion was filed, resolving all doubts and inferences against the moving party.
 * 4) J.—Summary judgment is proper when the party opposing the motion fails to show that there is a genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
 * 5) J.—Appellate review focuses not only on the pleadings, but also on the affidavits and other documents filed by the parties.
 * 6) A.—On appeal, the question as to whether there was a complete absence of a justiciable issue shall be reviewed de novo on the record of the trial court.
 * 7) E.—As a general rule, equity jurisdiction exists only when the remedy at law is inadequate; more particularly, equity will not entertain a contest over the validity of a statute nor