Whether the motions to strike under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(2) were decided correctly

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the motions to strike under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(2) were decided correctly or if the First Circuit , should apply a different legal standard as courts in dif, ferent circuits do. | Whether the District Court should have allowed the | motions to amend complaint under Rule 15(a), where other circuits follow a different rule. | Whether the First Circuit’s determinations under diversity jurisdiction were so inconsistent with Massachusetts law as to fail to follow Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, and hence unconstitutional. Whether the summary judgment motions should have been denied, where the were outside any possible construction of their claimed license given by the mortgage, rendering them trespassers as construed in courts in other circuits, and there was no evidence that the mortgagee had delegated any right to act at the Property. Whether the application of judicial estoppel was proper, when the Bankruptcy Code mandates a different procedure and other circuits come to a different result. ii | |