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 Kansas, 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 the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure. When a party files a motion for summary judgment, they are asserting that the evidence is so one-sided that they should prevail as a matter of law. The court will grant summary judgment if it finds that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. This does not infringe upon the constitutional right to a jury trial, as this right is preserved for cases where factual disputes exist that require a jury's assessment. Summary judgment is typically sought after the discovery phase, where the parties have exchanged information and evidence pertinent to the case. If the court agrees that the facts are clear and favor one party, and that no reasonable jury could find otherwise, it will grant summary judgment, effectively ending the case before it reaches trial.