We mourn the passing, on Aug. 2, of Justice James H. Coleman Jr., who, as a judge, author, teacher, and friend, was a pioneer and inspiration to us all. As a member of the New Jersey Supreme Court from 1994 to 2003, Coleman may be best remembered by the Bar for his opinion in Brill v. Guardian Life Insurance, 142 N.J. 520 (1995), dealing with the standard governing summary judgment and requiring judges (as stated in the often-cited quotation) to evaluate "whether the competent evidential materials presented, when viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party in consideration of the applicable evidentiary standard, are sufficient to permit a rational fact finder to resolve the alleged dispute in favor of the non-moving party." The test, governing motions under Rule 4:46-2, requires the same evaluation as required of a trial judge under Rule 4:37-2(b) in evaluating motions for dismissal at trial. The "thrust" of the decision was "to encourage trial courts not to refrain from granting summary judgment when the proper circumstances present themselves," id. at 541, thus avoiding unnecessarily long and costly trials, but not precluding the presentation of a claim when a "genuine" issue of material fact by a deserving litigant. Brill is one of the most cited cases in civil litigation and illustrates Coleman's intellect, balance and zeal for the practical.