Summary judgment

A summary judgment is a legal decision made by a court without a full trial. It is also known as judgment as a matter of law or summary disposition. In a typical lawsuit, the parties go through a long process to resolve their dispute. This usually leads to a trial where a factfinder decides what happened. However, a summary judgment allows a judge to end a case or certain parts of a case early. This happens when the court decides that a trial would not change the final outcome. It is a tool used to make the legal system more efficient by avoiding unnecessary proceedings.

To understand how this works, one must understand the roles of the judge and the factfinder. In common-law systems, the factfinder is responsible for deciding "what really happened" based on evidence. This role is traditionally filled by a jury, but in many jurisdictions, a judge can act as the factfinder too. The judge's primary job is to apply the law to the facts found by the factfinder. At the summary judgment stage, the judge does not decide which side's story is more believable. Instead, the judge looks only to see if there is a genuine dispute regarding material facts. A material fact is an important piece of information that could change the result of the case. If no reasonable factfinder could disagree on these facts, a trial is not needed.

There are different ways a party might move for summary judgment. A party that asks the court for this decision is called the movant. The opposing party is called the nonmovant. One common tactic involves a full evidentiary presentation. In this type, the movant must provide evidence for every essential part of their entire claim or defense. This serves as a written preview of the case they would present at trial. Another common tactic is more targeted. A defendant might move for summary judgment by attacking just one essential element of the plaintiff's claim. If the plaintiff cannot prove that single element, the entire claim fails, and the defendant wins.

In the United States, summary judgment is governed by specific rules in federal courts. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 dictates how these motions must be handled. The standards for these rules were shaped by three important legal cases from the 1980s. The case of Celotex Corp. v. Catrett clarified how the burden of proof shifts between parties. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. applied higher evidentiary standards to certain types of actions. Finally, Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. dealt with claims that were considered inherently implausible. It is important to note that in the U.S., summary judgment only applies to civil cases. It cannot be used in criminal cases because defendants have a constitutional right to a jury trial.

Data from the Federal Judicial Center provides insight into how often this occurs. Summary-judgment motions are filed in approximately 17% of federal cases. Most of these motions are filed by defendants, who account for 71% of the filings. Plaintiffs file these motions much less often, at a rate of 26%. The outcomes of these motions are also notable. About 64% of the motions are granted, either in whole or in part. Meanwhile, about 36% of the motions are denied by the court.

Before a motion can be filed, parties must engage in a process called discovery. During discovery, sides must disclose documents and show evidence, such as witness statements. This process is often lengthy, difficult, and expensive. A movant uses summary judgment to avoid these costs and the risks of a trial. They present evidence like depositions, which are recorded witness testimonies, or affidavits, which are sworn written statements. They may also use emails, contracts, and certified government documents. To ensure accuracy, the movant must include a declaration stating that all copies are true and correct.

There are strict protections to ensure fairness during this process. When a judge considers a motion, they must view all evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. If there is any chance a jury could decide in favor of the nonmovant, the judge must deny the motion. Even if one side has many witnesses and the other side has only one witness who is known to be a liar, the judge cannot grant summary judgment. The judge cannot decide who is telling the truth; that is a job for the trial. If a judge grants a summary judgment, the decision can be appealed immediately. If the judge denies the motion, the case simply continues its normal course toward trial.