Catrett (P) sued several asbestos manufacturers, claiming that the death of her husband resulted from exposure to their products. P’s suit was in negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability. Celotex (D) moved for summary judgment; no evidence existed that the decedent had been exposed to D's products. P produced three documents which she claimed demonstrates that a genuine factual dispute exists. D argued that the documents were inadmissible hearsay. The district court granted the motion for summary judgment; there was no showing that P’s husband had been exposed to D’s products. The court of appeals reversed; D had not offered sufficient evidence to rebut P's allegations in the form of affidavits or otherwise as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(e) and the decision in Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U. S. 144. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.