Edward A. Wagner - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         

               Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and                
          avoid unnecessary and expensive trials.  American Manufacturers             
          Mut. Ins. Co. v. American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres, Inc.,            
          388 F.2d 272, 278 (2d Cir. 1967); Boyd Gaming Corp. v.                      
          Commissioner, supra at 346; Florida Peach Corp. v. Commissioner,            
          90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988).  Rule 121(a) provides that “Either party           
          may move, with or without supporting affidavits, for a summary              
          adjudication in the moving party's favor upon all or any part of            
          the legal issues in controversy.”  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); Anderson v. Liberty             
          Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247 (1986); Williams v. Crichton, 84             
          F.3d 581, 587 (2d Cir. 1996); 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); Naftel v.                  
          Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985).                                      
               The moving party must prove that there is no genuine issue             
          of material fact, and all factual inferences are viewed in the              
          light most favorable to, and all ambiguities resolved in favor              
          of, the nonmoving party.  Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011