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 Alabama, the summary judgment process is a legal mechanism used to resolve a case without a trial when there are no genuine disputes over material facts that would require a jury's deliberation. This process is governed by Rule 56 of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure. A party may file a motion for summary judgment after the discovery phase has revealed sufficient facts to support their position. The moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. If the court agrees that the evidence presented shows that no reasonable jury could find in favor of the non-moving party, it may grant summary judgment, thus ending the case without a trial. This does not infringe upon the constitutional right to a jury trial, as that right is preserved for cases where factual disputes exist that require jury resolution.