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 Virginia, 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. Under Virginia law, summary judgment is governed by Rule 3:20 of the Virginia Supreme Court Rules. A party may file a motion for summary judgment after the commencement of the action but typically after the discovery process has revealed the pertinent facts. 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 finds that there are no disputed facts that require a jury's evaluation and that the moving party is entitled to judgment based on the law, it may grant summary judgment. This does not infringe upon the constitutional right to a jury trial, as this right is preserved for cases where factual disputes exist. Summary judgment is not commonly granted in Virginia state courts, especially in cases where the reasonable inference of facts could differ, as Virginia courts have a strong policy favoring the resolution of disputes by a jury.