Forkston Fireworks Mfg. Co., Inc. - Page 6

          Because the effect of granting a motion for summary judgment is             
          to decide the case against a party without allowing that party an           
          opportunity for a trial, the motion should be “cautiously                   
          invoked” and granted only after a careful consideration of the              
          case.  Associated Press v. United States, 326 U.S. 1, 6 (1945);             
          Cox v. American Fidelity & Casualty Co., 249 F.2d at 618; Kroh v.           
          Commissioner, 98 T.C. 383, 390 (1992).  Respondent, as the moving           
          party, has the burden of showing the absence of a genuine issue             
          as to any material fact.  For these purposes, the material                  
          submitted by both sides must be viewed in the light most                    
          favorable to the opposing party; that is, all doubts as to the              
          existence of an issue of material fact must be resolved against             
          the movant.  E.g., Adickes v. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157                
          (1970); Dreher v. Sielaff, 636 F.2d 1141, 1143 n.4 (7th Cir.                
          1980); Kroh v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. at 390.  In considering a              
          motion for summary judgment, we are to take into account “the               
          pleadings, answers to interrogatories, depositions, admissions,             
          and any other acceptable materials, together with the affidavits,           
          if any”.  Rule 121(b).                                                      
               Respondent relies on the criminal conviction of Anthony for            
          support of partial summary judgment.5  Respondent argues that               

               5    Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment is also based            
          on the deemed admissions in the Donnora docket.  Respondent’s               
          reliance on those deemed admissions is questionable, but because            
          we granted the Donnoras’ motion for leave of Court to deny the              
          deemed admissions we need not explore the validity of                       

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011