Who determines whether to grant summary judgment?

Who determines whether to grant summary judgment?

• A. Judge determines by considering the burden of proof at trial to see if a jury could go either way
• B. Jury decides whether to grant summary judgment
• C. Clerk decides whether to grant summary judgment
• D. The defendant's counsel decides whether to grant summary judgment

Answer: (A)

Summary judgment is a ruling on the legal sufficiency of the evidence, not a question for a jury. The judge decides whether there is no genuine dispute about any material fact and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Under the rules, the moving party must show that there is no triable issue by presenting evidence that there is no genuine fact for trial. If that showing succeeds, the burden shifts to the other side to come forward with specific facts showing a genuine dispute. If those facts aren’t shown, the judge grants judgment without a trial. A jury doesn’t decide this question, and a clerk doesn’t grant it. The test focuses on whether a reasonable jury could decide in the non-movant’s favor based on the evidence; if not, summary judgment is appropriate.

Summary judgment is a ruling on the legal sufficiency of the evidence, not a question for a jury. The judge decides whether there is no genuine dispute about any material fact and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Under the rules, the moving party must show that there is no triable issue by presenting evidence that there is no genuine fact for trial. If that showing succeeds, the burden shifts to the other side to come forward with specific facts showing a genuine dispute. If those facts aren’t shown, the judge grants judgment without a trial. A jury doesn’t decide this question, and a clerk doesn’t grant it. The test focuses on whether a reasonable jury could decide in the non-movant’s favor based on the evidence; if not, summary judgment is appropriate.