In a Commercial List proceeding between franchisees and a franchisor, the defendant sought to schedule a post‑discovery partial summary judgment motion while the plaintiffs proposed proceeding directly to trial.
The court addressed the growing practice of lengthy summary judgment motions brought after discoveries and emphasized the need to consider proportionality, efficient use of judicial resources, and whether such motions would advance the interests of justice.
The court held that parties seeking to schedule lengthy post‑discovery summary judgment motions must demonstrate that the benefits outweigh the risk of added cost and delay if the motion fails.
Detailed information regarding the proposed motion, anticipated trial, and potential time savings must be provided to assist the court in making that determination.
The scheduling appointment was adjourned and directions were issued requiring the parties to file structured information before a further attendance.
