- 12 -
Respondent’s Motion for
Summary Judgment as to Mr. Holguin
The Court may grant summary judgment where there is no
genuine issue of material fact and 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). We
conclude that there are no genuine issues of material fact
regarding the questions raised in respondent’s motion for summary
judgment as to Mr. Holguin.
Where, as is the case here, the validity of the underlying
tax liability is not properly placed at issue, the Court will
review the determination of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue
for abuse of discretion. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610
(2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000).
As was true of petitioners’ attachment to their 1994 Form
1040, petitioners’ attachment to their 1995 Form 1040, petition-
ers’ attachment to their 1996 Form 1040, and petitioners’ attach-
ment to Form 12153, petitioners’ response to respondent’s motion
for summary judgment as to Mr. Holguin (petitioners’ response as
to Mr. Holguin) contains statements, contentions, and arguments
that the Court finds to be frivolous and/or groundless.13
13The statements, contentions, and arguments set forth in
petitioners’ response as to Mr. Holguin are similar to the types
of statements, contentions, and arguments set forth in responses
by certain other taxpayers with cases in the Court to motions for
summary judgment and to impose a penalty under sec. 6673 filed by
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011