may include in the appeal the purely legal issues that were argued unsuccessfully in the motion for summary judgment, and the appellant need not have renewed that legal issue during trial to preserve it. See Johnson v. Alaska State Dep’t of Fish & Game, 836 P.2d 896, 904 n. 11 (Alaska 1991) (“Denials of summary judgment also may be reviewable on appeal when final judgment in a case comes after trial, but only if the facts applicable to the summary judgment ruling were not in dispute and the basis of the ruling is a matter of law.”); Bureau of Highways, Ky. v. Leneave, 751 S.W.2d 36, 37 (Ky.Ct.App.1988) (relying on Gumm v. Combs, 302 S.W.2d 616, 617 (Ky.1957)); Presbyterian Univ. Hosp. v. Wilson, 99 Md. App. 305, 637 A.2d 486, 490-91 (1994), affd, 337 Md. 541, 654 A.2d 1324 (1995) (<HOLDING>); DeJonge v. Mutual of Enumclaw, 104 Or.App.
holding a ruling on a motion for summary judgment adjudicating the rights of a party is a final judgment subject to appeal holding that we will not review under any standard the pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment after a full trial and final judgment on the merits holding that pure issue of law is preserved by motion for summary judgment and is reviewable after final judgment holding that the courts denial of either a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment is not a final judgment and is not reviewable  holding the denial of a motion for summary judgment on an issue which is later submitted to the jury is not reviewable