- 11 -
material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of
law." Rule 121(b); see Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S.
242, 247 (1986); 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).
Respondent's Third Request for Admissions covers all
remaining substantive issues in the case that were not disposed
of by the Court's prior opinion Anderson v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1998-253. Petitioners filed no response thereto within the
30-day period required by Rule 90(c). Petitioners did not
respond to the Court's subsequent orders to respond to
respondent's motions, and the opportunities thereby afforded
petitioners to move to vacate their deemed admissions if they had
shown any desire to provide answers or otherwise dispute the
conclusory facts embodied in respondent's Third Request for
Admissions.
Each matter set forth in respondent's Third Request for
Admissions is deemed admitted. See Rule 90(c); Marshall v.
Commissioner, 85 T.C. 267, 272 (1985). As a result, respondent
has carried his burden of proving that there is no genuine issue
of material fact that remains to be decided by the Court. See
Marshall v. Commissioner, supra at 271; see also Fajardo v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-308.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011