- 9 -
settlement, we would be required to consider any allocation in
the settlement agreement and/or the intent of the payors, to
determine whether the payment was made on account of personal
injuries or sickness. See Bagley v. Commissioner, 105 T.C. 396,
406-408 (1995), affd. 121 F.3d 393 (8th Cir. 1997).
Petitioner complains that respondent's opposition to
petitioner's motion does not comply with Rule 121(d), which
requires that supporting and opposing affidavits submitted with
respect to a motion for summary judgment shall be made on
personal knowledge and that sworn or certified copies of all
papers or parts thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be
attached thereto or filed therewith. Petitioner points out that
respondent has submitted an affidavit executed by Gregory Luna, a
Dupont legal assistant, that includes a reference to a settlement
between petitioner and Dupont, but the settlement document is not
attached to the affidavit. Petitioner is correct that the Luna
affidavit is insufficient in this regard. Nevertheless,
respondent did provide the Court with a copy of the
Dupont/Universal appeal and a copy of a distribution agreement
executed by petitioner that purportedly show that petitioner
ultimately received a payment from Dupont and Universal that is
less than the amount of the judgment entered by the trial court.
These documents suggest that petitioner entered into a settlement
with Dupont and Universal. Counsel for petitioner was unable to
definitively state that there was no settlement between
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011