- 6 -
Commissioner, 78 T.C. 412, 416 (1982) (and cases cited therein.)
The evidence of the nonmovant is to be believed, and all
justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor. Adickes v.
S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 158-159 (1970). There is,
however, no issue for trial unless there is sufficient evidence
favoring the nonmoving party for the finder of fact to find in
favor of the nonmoving party. First Natl. Bank v. Cities Serv.
Co., 391 U.S. 253, 288-289 (1968). The nonmovant’s evidence must
be more than merely colorable. Dombrowski v. Eastland, 387 U.S.
82, 84 (1967) (per curiam).
In this case, respondent seems to believe that factual
ambiguities in the record require a decision in his favor on this
motion. When considering a motion for summary judgment, however,
“the judge’s function is not himself to weigh the evidence and
determine the truth of the matter but to determine whether there
is a genuine issue for trial.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,
477 U.S. 242, 249 (1986); accord Shiosaki v. Commissioner, 61
T.C. 861, 862 (1974).
In Thurner v. Commissioner, supra at 53, a case cited by
respondent in his memorandum of authorities, a petitioning spouse
claimed that her participation in the prior litigation was not
material in that it was limited to signing pleadings and
documents in compliance with her husband’s instructions. The
Court held that the allegation “raises an issue of material fact
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011