Analysis: summary judgment standard

On review of summary judgment courts engage in the same inquiry as the trial court. Highline Sch. Dist. v. Port of Seattle, 87 Wn.2d 6, 15, 548 P.2d 1085 (1976). Summary judgment is appropriate if there is no issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Police Guild v. City of Seattle, 151 Wn.2d 823, 830, 92 P.3d 243 (2004).

The moving party bears this burden of proof. Young v. Key Pharm., 112 Wn.2d 216, 225, 770 P.2d 182 (1989).

Based on this standard, Saberhagen bears the burden of proof that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.