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 Iowa, 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 necessitate a jury's deliberation. This process is governed by the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure. A party may file a motion for summary judgment after the discovery phase has revealed facts that, in the moving party's view, clearly support their position and would lead any reasonable jury to the same conclusion. If the court agrees that there are no factual disputes and that the law is on the side of the moving party, it will grant summary judgment, effectively ending the case. 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 a jury's assessment. An attorney representing a party in such a case would typically file a motion for summary judgment, outlining the undisputed facts and applicable law, and argue that the case can be decided as a matter of law without a jury.