Dr. Tanaka was served with a malpractice lawsuit based on allegedly removing the wrong organ. Following discovery, it becomes clear that the plaintiff has no credible evidence against the doctor, and that no reasonable jury could rule in the plaintiff's favor. How should Dr. Tanaka's lawyer proceed?

A. The lawyer should make a motion for summary judgment.

B. The lawyer should make a motion for additional discovery.

C. The lawyer should make a motion to amend the answer in order to make a motion to dismiss.

D. The lawyer should file a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

E. The lawyer should proceed to trial.

The lawyer should make a motion for summary judgment.

Explanation:

A motion for summary judgement can be considered as a request that is made to the court for ruling other party that it has no case since there were no facts on the case. When the party makes the motion, it claims that the jury must rule in the moving party's side or the case should not move before a jury.

A party can involve in filing a motion for summary judgment when the party feels that there are no facts in the case or problem. In the example given, there exists no evidence against the doctor and hence no jury can rule in favor of the plaintiff. Thus, the Doctor's lawyer should make a motion for summary judgment.

The correct answer is letter "A": The lawyer should make a motion for summary judgment.

Explanation:

A motion for summary judgment is entered when one party of a court case claims the counterparty has no clear evidence of what is stating. The motion could be useful to request not going forward with the case to avoid taking it in front of a jury or to reconsider the final decision of a judge who could have made a mistake. The motion should be presented within 30 days after the close of discovery.