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 New Jersey, the summary judgment process is governed by Rule 4:46 of the New Jersey Court Rules. This rule allows a party to move for summary judgment after the pleadings are closed but at least 30 days before the trial date. The motion can be granted if the moving party demonstrates that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. If the court finds that the evidence is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law, summary judgment may be granted. This process is designed to expedite the resolution of cases where legal issues predominate and factual disputes are absent or insufficient to warrant a trial. The use of summary judgment in New Jersey does not infringe upon the constitutional right to a jury trial, as it is only applied in cases where factual issues are not present for a jury to decide.