- 7 -
Cir. 1991). In fact, in LeFever v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 525,
538 n.16 (1994), we granted respondent's post-trial motion for
leave to amend her answer so as to include the affirmative
defense of quasi-estoppel.
Under the circumstances of this case and in light of the
instruction from the Court of Appeals, we do not believe that
petitioners will be unfairly prejudiced by the proposed amendment
of the pleadings. Accordingly, we grant respondent’s motion.
As we have granted respondent’s motion to amend her answer,
it is necessary that we deny petitioners’ motion for summary
judgment. Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation
and avoid unnecessary costs. Florida Peach Corp. v.
Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988). Summary judgment is
inappropriate if there remains an unresolved genuine issue as to
a material fact. Rule 121(b); Zaentz v. Commissioner, 90 T.C.
753, 754 (1988). Considering our ruling granting respondent’s
motion for leave to amend, a genuine issue remains unresolved.
Hence, summary judgment is improper. Accordingly, petitioners’
motion is denied.
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order will be
issued granting respondent’s motion
and denying petitioners’ motion.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011