Often movants will use the statute they are saying applies (the SJ statute), and the "seminal" case that best describes that statute. You must typically show that there are no material facts IN DISPUTE pertaining to the issue you want the judge to rule SJ on. For instance, if you are sued on a credit card #***** yet the discovery provided by the plaintiff actually shows that John Doe is the account holder, not you, you could file for SJ on that issue, describe why, refer to "attachment A" which shows the statement of account provided by the plaintiff in his provision of discovery to you and explain that the defendent himself, in his discovery, does not dispute that John Doe is listed on the statement of account, not you and as such SJ the fact that you were not the account holder... and, for a dismissal based on the fact that there is no evidence that you are in default of any such credit card. Now, you didn't provide those pertinent undisputed facts and the issue to which they'd pertain, so I am using this obvious example. But, that is how SJ works. Basically, it says, there is NO disputed facts on issue X that the jury (or factfinder, if a judge and not a jury) needs to decide, since the evidence (not the claim, but the evidence) from all parties fails to support plaintiff's alleged fact. Not a "scintilla" of evidence from Def. that he can present to jury to show the his fact is true and your denial is not.
Now, when you are OPPOSING his SJ, you WANT to show that there is evidence in dispute of what he is claiming there is not. So point out that evidence that was provided in discovery (generally SJ motions must be heard AFTER discovery takes place), attach a copy of the document that disputes what he says, etc. Once there is "genuine" dispute, THEN SJ is defeated and the case continues on to the jury.