What type of judgment does a trial judge issue when there is no genuine issue of material fact in dispute?

A trial judge issues a summary judgment when no genuine issue of material fact is in dispute. This legal ruling allows the judge to decide a case without going to trial because the evidence presented (whether in the form of affidavits, depositions, or documents) demonstrates that one party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

The concept behind summary judgment is that if there are no factual disagreements that would necessitate a trial, the court can resolve the case based solely on the law. This helps streamline judicial processes and ensures that cases that do not require a trial are resolved efficiently.

In other contexts, a directed verdict refers to a ruling made during a trial, indicating that no reasonable jury could reach a different conclusion based on the presented evidence. Judgment N.O.V. (non obstante veredicto) occurs after a jury verdict, indicating that the judge believes that no reasonable jury could have reached that verdict based on the evidence. Remittitur is a process used by a judge to reduce an excessive jury award. Each of these concepts differs significantly from summary judgment, which pertains directly to resolving cases before they reach trial based on undisputed facts.