Newhouse Broadcasting Corporation and Subsidiaries, et al. - Page 11

                                               - 11 -                                                  
           increase in the financial statement royalty reserve for such                                
           years.                                                                                      
                 II.  Summary Judgment                                                                 
                 A summary judgment is appropriate "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).  "A                             
           partial summary adjudication may be made which does not dispose of                          
           all the issues in the case."  Id.  Summary judgment is a device                             
           used to expedite litigation and is intended to avoid unnecessary                            
           and expensive trials of phantom factual questions.  See, e.g.,                              
           Espinoza v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 412, 415-416 (1982).  It is not,                          
           however, a substitute for a trial in that disputes over factual                             
           issues are not to be resolved in such proceedings.  See id.  The                            
           party moving for summary judgment has the burden of showing the                             
           absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact.  See id.                                
           III.  Discussion                                                                            
                 A.  Arguments of the Parties                                                          
                 Respondent argues that, because the author contracts provide                          
           that Random House is liable to pay a royalty amount that subtracts                          
           a reasonable reserve for returns, Random House does not owe its                             
           authors the amount of the reasonable reserve for returns.  Because                          
           petitioner does not owe this amount, and because it does not                                






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011