- 5 -
Petitioner appeared at the hearing on respondent’s motion.
She testified that she was unaware of the tax case for 1999 until
she was called by Thomas who informed her that she had to go to
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) office “that day” to sign the
decision document. She testified that she was unrepresented and
did not have time to prepare. She spoke with the IRS attorney,
she stated, who informed her that he was not her attorney and
could not give her legal advice. She testified that she was and
presently is afraid of reprisal from her former husband should
she challenge the settlement. Further, she said that she thought
she could sign the decision document and nevertheless institute a
later action under section 6015.
Standard for Granting Summary Judgment
The standard for granting a motion for summary judgment
under Rule 121 is stated in the Rule itself.
A decision shall * * * be rendered 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).1]
The moving party has the burden of “showing” the absence of
a genuine issue as to any material fact. See Espinoza v.
1Rule 121 is derived from Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 56. Therefore,
authorities interpreting the latter will be considered by the
Court in applying the Rule. Espinoza v. Commissioner, 78 T.C.
412, 415-416 (1982).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011