Lone Star Life Insurance Company - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         

          to provide Hibiscus with advance, formal notice that respondent             
          had elected to treat petitioner as having separate filing                   
          status.6                                                                    
          The parties' motions were called for hearing at the Court's                 
          motions session in Washington, D.C.  Counsel for both parties               
          appeared at the hearing and presented argument with respect to              
          the pending motions.  Subsequent to the hearing, petitioner filed           
          a further written statement with the Court, to which respondent             
          filed a response.                                                           
          Discussion                                                                  
               1. Period of Limitations                                               
          Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and                     
          avoid unnecessary and expensive trials.  Florida Peach Corp. v.             
          Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988).  Summary judgment may be             
          granted with respect to all or any part of the legal issues in              
          controversy "if the pleadings, answers to interrogatories,                  
          depositions, admissions, and any other acceptable materials,                
          together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no                 
          genuine issue as to any material fact and that a decision may be            
          rendered as a matter of law."  Rule 121(b); Sundstrand Corp. v.             
          Commissioner, 98 T.C. 518, 520 (1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th               
          Cir. 1994); Zaentz v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 753, 754 (1988);                


          6  Respondent cites INI, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.                   
          1995-112, affd. without published opinion 107 F.3d 27 (11th Cir.            
          1997), as the cause for concern on this point.                              




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011