With respect to Trcp 166, the courts will grant a no-evidence request for retrial 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 request for retrial for summary judgment that was granted before the discovery period had ended because they thought about there had been enough 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 request for retrial was filed to the time it was absolutely heard and decided. The court ended there has been more than an enough time for discovery, even though the no-evidence request for retrial for summary judgment was granted before the discovery period concluded.
Again, in another state court case, the judge granted a no-evidence request for retrial for summary judgment and thought about that an enough time for discovery had passed because the lawsuit had been ongoing for more than sixteen months and the trial judge had already granted one prolongation to the discovery period. Additionally, there was only 8 days until the end of the discovery period when the no-evidence request for retrial for summary judgment was granted.
In Texas, courts are inclined to affirm the granting of a no-evidence request for retrial 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.Interpreting Rule 166 of the Texas Rules of Civil procedure