FRCP Rule 56: Summary Judgment Standard Explained

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 governs summary judgment in federal civil litigation. The rule sets the standard for when courts must grant summary judgment, the timing for filing motions, the procedures for supporting and opposing the motion, and the consequences of failing to address material facts. Rule 56 was substantially revised in 2010 to consolidate the procedural framework that the Supreme Court had developed in Celotex, Anderson, and Matsushita.

This guide walks through Rule 56 subsection by subsection, explains the substantive standard, and shows how the rule interacts with state-court summary judgment practice. Read alongside the motion for summary judgment overview For procedural mechanics and the opposition guide for non-movant strategy.

Rule 56(a): The Standard

Under FRCP 56(a), a party may move for summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense, or the part of each claim or defense, on which summary judgment is sought. The court must grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

The "shall grant" language is mandatory. If the standard is met, the court has no discretion to deny the motion. In practice, judges retain effective discretion through fact-intensive determinations of what counts as a "genuine dispute" and a "material fact," but the substantive standard is binding.

Rule 56(b): Time for Filing

Unless a different time is set by local rule or the court orders otherwise, a party may file a motion for summary judgment at any time until thirty days after the close of all discovery. Most federal districts and individual judges set specific deadlines through scheduling orders. Filing earlier is permitted but risks denial as premature unless discovery on the dispositive issues is complete.

Rule 56(c): Procedures

FRCP 56(c) establishes the supporting and opposition framework:

• 56(c)(1): A party asserting that a fact cannot be genuinely disputed must support the assertion by citing to particular parts of materials in the record (depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits, declarations, stipulations, admissions, interrogatory answers), or by showing that the cited materials do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute.
• 56(c)(2): A party may object that material cited to support or dispute a fact cannot be presented in a form that would be admissible in evidence.
• 56(c)(3): The court need consider only the cited materials, but it may consider other materials in the record.
• 56(c)(4): An affidavit or declaration used to support or oppose a motion must be made on personal knowledge, set out facts that would be admissible in evidence, and show that the affiant or declarant is competent to testify on the matters stated.

Rule 56(d): When Facts Are Unavailable

If a non-movant shows by affidavit or declaration that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to justify its opposition, the court may: defer considering the motion or deny it, allow time to obtain affidavits or to take discovery, or issue any other appropriate order. Rule 56(d) is the mechanism for opposing premature summary judgment when discovery is incomplete.

Rule 56(e): Failing to Properly Support or Address a Fact

If a party fails to properly support an assertion of fact or fails to properly address another party's assertion of fact as required by Rule 56(c), the court may: give an opportunity to properly support or address the fact, consider the fact undisputed for purposes of the motion, grant summary judgment if the motion and supporting materials show that the movant is entitled to it, or issue any other appropriate order.

Rule 56(f): Judgment Independent of the Motion

After giving notice and a reasonable time to respond, the court may grant summary judgment for a non-movant, grant the motion on grounds not raised by the parties, or consider summary judgment on its own. Rule 56(f) authorizes the court to grant summary judgment in unexpected ways, but only after notice to the affected party.

Rule 56(g): Failing to Grant All the Relief Requested

If the court does not grant all the relief requested by the motion, it may enter an order stating any material fact, including an item of damages or other relief, that is not genuinely in dispute and treating the fact as established in the case. This subsection authorizes partial findings that simplify trial.

Rule 56(h): Affidavit or Declaration Submitted in Bad Faith

If satisfied that an affidavit or declaration was submitted in bad faith or solely for delay, the court, after notice and a reasonable time to respond, may order the submitting party to pay the other party's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred as a result. The court may also hold the submitting party or counsel in contempt or impose other sanctions.

State-Court Variations

Most state procedural codes have a Rule 56 analog with similar standards but procedural variations:

• California Uses CCP 437c with detailed separate-statement requirements and a thirty-day notice period before hearing.
• New York Uses CPLR 3212 with a different burden allocation that some practitioners consider more favorable to non-movants.
• Texas Uses TRCP 166a with both traditional and no-evidence summary judgment procedures.
• Ohio Civ. R. 56(F) allows the trial court to grant a continuance during summary judgment proceedings so that additional discovery may be had to oppose a motion. This is left to the sound discretion of the trial court (Fiske v. Rooney, 126 Ohio App.).

Removing a case to federal court can change the applicable summary judgment standard for diversity cases, because federal procedural law (including Rule 56) governs in federal court regardless of the underlying state-law claims.

When You Need an Attorney

Rule 56 motions are technically demanding and the consequences of getting them wrong are case-ending. Legal Tank's attorney-drafted summary judgment service Handles motions and oppositions under Rule 56 with full record citations and procedural compliance. The summary judgment template Covers federal and state-court formats.

Related Civil Procedure Guides

• filing a summary judgment motion
• beating a summary judgment motion
• drafting a summary judgment brief
• voir dire jury selection process
• voir dire questions and questionnaires

Frequently Asked Questions

What is FRCP Rule 56?

FRCP Rule 56 governs summary judgment in federal civil litigation. Subsection 56(a) provides for motions for summary judgment or partial summary judgment: a party may move for summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense, or the part of each claim or defense, on which summary judgment is sought. The court must grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

What is the Rule of Civil Procedure 56(F) in Ohio?

Ohio Civ. R. 56(F) allows the trial court to grant a continuance during summary judgment proceedings so that additional discovery may be had to oppose a motion. This is relegated to the sound discretion of the trial court (Fiske v. Rooney, 126 Ohio App.). The Ohio rule parallels the federal Rule 56(d) provision, which permits the court to defer ruling or allow additional discovery when the non-movant shows by affidavit that essential facts are unavailable without further discovery.

Is summary judgment hard to win?

Yes. Judges can deny summary judgment with a decision on the margin, but to grant summary judgment they have to issue a written decision. To win on summary judgment, a movant has to convince a judge that it is a good use of the court's limited time to write that decision rather than letting the jury resolve the dispute. Federal grant rates run roughly 50 to 70 percent on individual claims when motions are filed, but only a fraction of cases reach the summary judgment stage at all.

What is the Civil Procedure Act 2005 section 56?

Section 56 of the Australian Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) requires parties to proceedings and their lawyers to engage in prompt, courteous, and genuine cooperation in the conduct of proceedings. This is unrelated to FRCP Rule 56, which governs summary judgment in U.S. Federal courts. Practitioners researching FRCP 56 should be careful to distinguish the two; the Australian provision shares only a number, not substance.