(R.I.2012))). “Ultimately, the ‘purpose of the summary judgment procedure is issue finding, not issue determination.’ ” DeMaio v. Ciccone, 59 A.3d 125, 130 (R.I.2013) (quoting Estate of Giuliano v. Giuliano, 949 A.2d 386, 391 (R.I.2008)). After examining the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and drawing reasonable inferences, summary judgment is appropriate only when “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and * * * the moving party is entitled to judgment as [a] matter of law.” Sola v. Leighton, 45 A.3d 502, 506 (R.I.2012) (quoting Plunkett v. State, 869 A.2d 1185, 1187 (R.I.2005) (emphasis added)). If the evidence submitted permits an inference that creates a genuine issue of material fact, the motion must be denied. See DeMaio, 59 A.3d at 132 (<HOLDING>). Finally, “[sjummary judgment is a drastic
holding that at the summary judgment stage there must be sufficient evidence on which the jury could find for the plaintiff holding that fact finder may draw reasonable inferences from evidence and choose which inference is most reasonable holding that a superior court justice may not choose between conflicting inferences at summary judgment stage holding that credibility determinations should not be resolved at the summary judgment stage holding that unverified complaints cannot be considered as evidence at the summary judgment stage