{ Free Legal Service & Advice }

With respect to TRCP 166, the courts will grant a no-evidence motion for summary judgment before the discovery period ends,

because the case may not be of a complex nature if it is a simple breach of contract, fraud and unjust enrichment case.

In another Texas court case, the court would not overturn the grant of a no-evidence motion for summary judgment that was

granted before the discovery period had ended because they determined there had been adequate time for discovery since the

case had been pending for 10 years, interrogatories had been served, nearly 200 depositions had been taken and personal and

employment records had been obtained, and the plaintiff's had more than a year to conduct additional discovery from the time

the motion was filed to the time it was actually heard and decided. The court concluded there has been more than an adequate

time for discovery, even though the no-evidence motion for summary judgment was granted before the discovery period

concluded.

Again, in another state court case, the judge granted a no-evidence motion for summary judgment and determined that an

adequate time for discovery had passed because the lawsuit had been ongoing for more than sixteen months and the trial

judge had already granted one extension to the discovery period. Additionally, there was only 8 days until the end of the

discovery period when the no-evidence motion for summary judgment was granted.

In Texas, courts are inclined to affirm the granting of a no-evidence motion for summary judgment before the discovery period

has expired especially if the appellants had ample time to conduct discovery during the pending of the case.

If you or a loved one needs a trial attorney then look no further than The Bell Group. We are litigation attorneys who will fight

for your rights.