- 6 -
1986 was sent to petitioner by certified mail on September 19,
1994.
OPINION
Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and
avoid unnecessary and expensive trials of phantom factual issues.
Kroh v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 383, 390 (1992); Florida Peach
Corp. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988); Shiosaki v.
Commissioner, 61 T.C. 861, 862 (1974). Summary judgment is
appropriate "if the pleadings, answers to interrogatories,
depositions, admissions, and any other acceptable materials,
together with the affidavits, if any, show 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);
Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). Because the
Court's granting of a motion for summary judgment decides against
a party before trial, such a disposition should be cautiously
invoked and used sparingly after carefully ascertaining that the
moving party has met all the requirements for the granting of a
summary judgment motion. Associated Press v. United States, 326
U.S. 1, 6 (1945); Espinoza v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 412, 416
(1982).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011