How to Write a Motion for Summary Judgement

Ask a trial lawyer which filing ends the most cases short of a verdict, and many name the same one, a motion for summary judgment. In employment and labor litigation especially, the dispute often closes here, long before a jury is seated. These cases turn on a single question that has little to do with the polish of anyone's writing. They turn on whether the facts are genuinely contested, and the paper that answers that question carries the weight the reader already feels.

Most guidance treats the motion as a form with slots to fill, a caption, a facts section, an argument, and a proposed order, with a junior lawyer learning to populate each one. The motions that succeed come from a harder discipline. They map every element of every claim and defense to the specific evidence in the record. Then they read that record honestly, looking for where a dispute is real and where it only looks real. Assembling that record, from deposition testimony to the responses to your discovery requests, with accurate citations, is slow work, and it often crowds out the analysis that decides the case.

A motion that overstates the record or misses a genuine dispute does more than fail. It hands the other side a roadmap, invites a skeptical look from the court, and sends a case that might have ended into the cost and uncertainty of trial. The difference between a motion that persuades and one that gets denied lies in how carefully the facts are built and tested. In this article you will learn how to write a motion for summary judgment that meets that standard, from the statement of undisputed facts through the argument, and where AI-assisted drafting fits without displacing the lawyer's judgment.

The Standard a Summary Judgment Motion Must Meet

A motion for summary judgment asks the court to decide a claim or defense without a trial when no material fact is genuinely disputed. To write one, state the undisputed facts with citations to the record, then argue that those facts entitle the moving party to judgment under the governing law.

The standard is quick to state and demanding to meet. A court grants the motion when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Each half of that phrase does real work. A fact is material when it could change the outcome under the law that governs the claim. A dispute is genuine when the evidence would let a reasonable jury return a verdict for the party opposing the motion.

The burden shifts as the motion proceeds. The moving party goes first, and it can carry that burden by showing the record holds no evidence on an essential element of the opponent's case. The opposing party must then come forward with specific evidence a reasonable jury could credit. Doubt, speculation, or a hope that something will surface at trial will not hold off a well-supported motion.

Two more points shape how these motions get written. Defendants file most of them, since a defendant that shows the plaintiff lacks evidence on any single element can end the claim. A motion can also be partial, resolving one claim or even one issue while the rest of the case proceeds. Throughout, the court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion and draws reasonable inferences in that party's favor, so a motion has to account for that generous reading.

The Documents That Make up a Summary Judgment Motion

A motion for summary judgment is a package of coordinated documents, and one of them carries most of the weight. Where the matter itself lives in litigation management software, the motion is built somewhere else, in the drafting and analysis work described below. The filing usually includes a notice of motion and a supporting brief or memorandum of law. It also includes a separate statement of undisputed material facts, the evidence behind each fact, and a proposed order for the court to sign. The separate statement is where the motion is won or lost, and the sections below return to it in depth.

The brief argues the law and applies it to the facts. The supporting evidence is what makes a fact admissible. It takes familiar forms, such as declarations or affidavits made on personal knowledge, excerpts from deposition transcripts, answers to interrogatories, requests for admission, and authenticated exhibits. Every asserted fact must cite a particular part of the record, a transcript page and line or an exhibit and paragraph, so the court can verify it without hunting. Local rules add their own requirements, and many courts prescribe the exact format and numbering of the statement of facts, so the first step in any jurisdiction is to read the court's standing orders.

Tools for legal drafting now do real work at this stage. Harvey can draft or respond to a motion for summary judgment inside the Word document where the lawyer already writes. It develops the factual and legal arguments and assembles the statement of undisputed facts with citations to the record. In an employment matter, that means developing and drafting arguments to show the absence or existence of a genuine issue of material fact under the applicable labor-law standard. The result is a first draft that a qualified lawyer must review and verify before it is filed or relied upon, because responsibility for the record and the law stays with the lawyer.

The Statement of Undisputed Material Facts as the Motion's Foundation

Most motions are decided in the statement of undisputed facts, before the argument section is ever read. A judge who works through a clear, well-supported statement has largely reached a conclusion by the time the legal argument begins. So the statement deserves more care than any other part of the filing.

The method that produces a strong statement is unglamorous and reliable. Take each element of each claim and defense, and match it to the specific evidence that establishes or negates it. A discrimination claim, for example, breaks into elements the plaintiff must prove, and each one either has record support or it does not. Working element by element shows which facts are genuinely undisputed and which are contested, and it keeps the statement focused on facts that matter to the outcome.

Two habits separate a statement that holds up from one that invites attack. Start with pinpoint citation. Every asserted fact points to a precise place in the record, a deposition page and line, an interrogatory answer, or an authenticated exhibit the court and the opponent can check in seconds. Pair that with restraint. Asserting as undisputed something the record does not clearly support is the fastest way to lose credibility and hand the opposing party an opening. The opponent needs only one genuine dispute on a material fact to defeat the motion on that point.

The payoff of this rigor shows up in practice. According to The Accelerating Impact of Legal AI, a litigation partner used Harvey to surface a critical factual issue in a matter approaching trial that three years of earlier work by another firm had missed. A motion is only as strong as the review behind it. A disciplined pass over the full record turns a stack of documents into a statement of facts the court can rely on.

Analysis tools earn their place here. Harvey can review the depositions, interrogatory answers, and exhibits in the record, surface where the evidence supports or undercuts each element, and check each asserted fact against the citation attached to it. Grounding every answer in the underlying source is what makes that output useful to a litigator, and the lawyer still verifies each record citation before the statement is filed.

Testing Your Motion Against the Opposition you Will Face

A summary judgment motion is written against the opposition it will draw. The reader to keep in mind is the lawyer on the other side, working to find one genuine dispute that keeps the case alive. The moving party has to show that even on the opponent's own evidence, and with every reasonable inference read in the opponent's favor, no reasonable jury could find for them. That is a high bar, and it means the motion has to anticipate the other side's best factual disputes and answer them before they are raised.

The discipline is to draft the opponent's opposition in your head before you write your own. Walk each fact you plan to call undisputed and ask how the other side will contest it, whether through conflicting testimony, a competing document, or an inference the record allows. Then sort those responses into the ones that raise a genuine dispute on a material fact and the ones that raise only an immaterial quibble or a doubt the record cannot support. The motion addresses the genuine disputes head-on and explains why the rest do not defeat it.

Employment litigation shows how this plays out. In a discrimination case under the McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green framework, the plaintiff makes a prima facie case, the employer offers a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason, and the fight moves to whether that reason is a pretext. Pretext is where the genuine-issue question is won or lost, because the plaintiff will point to inconsistencies, timing, or comparators to argue that a reasonable jury could disbelieve the employer. A motion that has already gathered the record on each of those points, and shown why it does not add up to a triable dispute, is far harder to oppose.

This kind of adversarial testing is exactly what the strongest AI users have learned to do. According to Perspectives on Legal AI's Power Users, the most sophisticated users go past asking for a draft. They use the tool to probe the weaknesses in a line of argument and to see a matter from the opposing side's position, including the soft spots in their own client's case. A litigator can put that to work on a summary judgment motion. Ask Harvey to stress-test a draft argument against the disputes the opposing party is most likely to raise, then strengthen the motion where it is thin. As with any AI output, the lawyer reviews what comes back and decides what holds.

How to use AI to Draft a Motion for Summary Judgment

Legal AI has changed how fast the first version of a motion comes together, and it has sharpened where a lawyer's attention belongs. A tool can draft the argument, assemble the statement of facts, and pull the record citations in a fraction of the time. Responsibility for accuracy stays with the lawyer, and in a summary judgment motion accuracy is everything, because a mischaracterized fact or an invented citation can sink the motion and draw a sanction.

Verification here is exacting and required. Check every record citation against the transcript or exhibit it points to, and check every legal proposition against the authority it rests on. According to AI Fluency and the Future of Associate Development at Law Firms, reviewing, verifying, and pressure-testing every piece of AI-generated work product is a core professional obligation, and editing has become a central skill as tools produce the first draft. That obligation tracks a lawyer's existing duties of competence, candor to the court, and supervision, and today those duties extend to understanding the benefits and risks of the technology a lawyer uses. Courts have already sanctioned lawyers who filed briefs citing cases that a generative AI tool had fabricated, which is the cautionary backdrop for any AI-assisted filing.

Grounding is what makes AI-assisted drafting workable here. Harvey ties its output to the record and returns citations to the source behind each statement. A lawyer can trace a drafted fact straight to the deposition page or exhibit it came from and confirm it. That traceability speeds verification. A qualified lawyer still reviews the output before it is filed or relied upon.

The pattern shows up in how litigation teams adopt these tools. Lynn Pinker Hurst & Schwegmann uses Harvey across drafting arguments and analyses, legal research, and deposition preparation. Its attorneys report saving over eight hours a week, time they reinvest into case strategy. The firm frames Harvey as amplifying its lawyers' judgment and freeing them to concentrate on the work that decides cases. That is the right frame for a summary judgment motion, where the tool accelerates the assembly and the lawyer supplies the judgment.

A Step-by-Step Process for Drafting a Motion

A repeatable sequence turns everything above into a drafting workflow. The steps below assume the discovery record is largely complete and the governing law is settled.

Confirm the standard and the deadline

Verify the filing timing in your court, since a party may move until 30 days after the close of discovery unless a local rule or the judge sets a different date. Then read the local rules on the format of the papers.

Map each element to the record

For every claim and defense in play, list the elements and match each to the specific evidence that establishes or negates it, so you can see where the facts are genuinely undisputed.

Draft the statement of undisputed facts

Write each fact as a short, numbered assertion with a pinpoint citation to the record, and assert only what the evidence clearly supports.

Write the argument

Lead with the strongest ground, apply the law to the undisputed facts, and answer the opposing party's best disputes before they are raised.

Verify everything

Check each record citation against its source and each legal proposition against its authority, and confirm every supporting declaration meets the personal-knowledge requirement.

Prepare the proposed order and file

Draft an order the court can sign, confirm the local formatting and courtesy-copy rules, and assemble the papers for filing, updating the matter management record once it is filed.

What Makes a Summary Judgment Motion Succeed?

A motion for summary judgment succeeds when the facts do the work. The strongest motions are built element by element, with each material fact tied to a precise place in the record and asserted only where the evidence is genuinely undisputed. They read the record honestly, separate real disputes from ones that only look real, and answer the opposing party's best arguments before the court has to ask.

The legal argument matters, and it rests on that foundation. A clear statement of undisputed facts, careful pinpoint citations, and an honest reading of what a reasonable jury could find are what carry a motion under the genuine-issue standard. Where AI for legal drafting fits, it accelerates the assembly and the first draft while the lawyer verifies every citation and supplies the judgment that decides the case.

Harvey helps litigation teams do this work faster, drafting motions and responses, building the statement of undisputed facts, and grounding every argument in the record, so lawyers can spend their time on strategy. To see how Harvey supports summary judgment practice in your organization, request a demo.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between a motion for summary judgment and a motion to dismiss?

A motion to dismiss tests whether the complaint states a valid claim on its face, before discovery and without evidence. A motion for summary judgment comes later, after discovery, and asks the court to rule on the evidence because no material fact is genuinely disputed. The first tests the pleading. The second tests the evidence behind it.

When can you file a motion for summary judgment?

A party can usually move at any time until 30 days after the close of all discovery, unless a local rule or a court order sets a different deadline. Many parties file after discovery closes, when the factual record is complete enough to show what is and is not genuinely disputed. Always check the scheduling order in your case.

What counts as a genuine issue of material fact?

A fact is material when it could affect the outcome under the governing law. A dispute over that fact is genuine when the evidence would let a reasonable jury find for the party opposing the motion. A minor factual disagreement that would not change the result is not enough to defeat the motion.

How do you respond to a motion for summary judgment?

To oppose the motion, identify the material facts that are genuinely disputed and cite specific record evidence for each one, since argument alone will not create a dispute. Point to deposition testimony, documents, or declarations that would let a reasonable jury find in your favor. It also helps to show that a fact the movant calls undisputed is genuinely contested or immaterial.

Can a motion for summary judgment resolve only part of a case?

Yes. A court can grant partial summary judgment on a single claim, a defense, or even a specific issue, while the remaining matters proceed toward trial. Narrowing the case this way can remove weak claims, focus discovery disputes, and shape what a jury eventually hears.