Whether there is an exception to the rule that a pretrial denial of summary judgment is not reviewable on appeal

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50 requires a party that loses at trial to move for judgment as a matter of law, both at the close of evidence and following the verdict. “[A]bsent such a motion, * * * an appellate court is ‘powerless’ to review” the claimed basis for setting aside the resulting judgment. Ortiz v. Jordan, 532 U.S. 180, 189 (2011). Consistent with that, pretrial orders denying summary judgment generally are not themselves reviewable after trial. Once trial has taken place, the case is reviewed based on the actual “evidence received in court.” Id. at 184. The questions presented are: 1. Whether, notwithstanding the ordinary rule that a pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment is not reviewable on appeal, there is an exception for summaryjudgment decisions that turn solely on “legal issues.” 2. Whether an order denying summary judgment can be reviewed following trial, at the discretion of the court of appeals, notwithstanding a party’s failure to seek judgment as a matter of law on those grounds under Rule 50. (i)