The summary judgment process provides a method of terminating a case before it is submitted to the jury when only questions of law are involved and there are no genuine issues of fact. When a party to a lawsuit cannot show that there is a fact issue for the jury to determine, the grant of summary judgment to the opposing party does not violate the constitutional right to a jury trial.

A summary judgment is often filed after the parties discover some facts in the discovery process, and one or both parties believe that the facts conclusively establish their right to prevail at trial, and that no reasonable jury could find the facts to be otherwise.

In Alaska, the summary judgment process is a legal mechanism that allows a court to resolve a case without a full trial when there are no genuine disputes over material facts that would require a jury's deliberation. Under Alaska Civil Rule 56, a party may file a motion for summary judgment asserting that the evidence gathered during discovery clearly shows that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The opposing party must then demonstrate that there is indeed a genuine issue for trial. If the court finds that there are no factual disputes and that the moving party is entitled to judgment based on the undisputed facts, it will grant summary judgment. This process does not infringe upon the constitutional right to a jury trial, as it is only applied in situations where factual disputes are absent and only legal questions remain. Summary judgment can be sought by any party and can be directed toward all or part of the claims or defenses at stake.