Just to clarify, summary judgment doesn't necessarily mean without jury involvement. Summary judgment is based upon a pre-trial motion where one side basically says "Looking at the entirety of the undisputable facts and legal arguments at issue, there is essentially no need to go to trial (either bench or jury) and the matter can be decided now." Oddly enough, it's not entirely uncommon for both sides to file motions for summary judgment.
Is that what happened to the fraud finding in this case? Was it based on summary judgment? I knew the trial was about damages, but I never knew the finding of liability for fraud was based on an MSJ (Motion for Summary Judgment).
| 
