- 5 -
Uscinski filed a response to respondent’s motion, arguing only
that nothing in Rule 121 permits successive or repeated motions
for summary judgment.
Discussion
The purpose of summary judgment is to expedite litigation
and avoid the expense of unnecessary trials. Fla. Peach Corp. v.
Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988). A motion for summary
judgment may be granted where there is no dispute as to a
material fact and a decision may be rendered as a matter of law.
See Rule 121. The moving party bears the burden of proving that
there is no genuine issue of material fact, and factual
inferences are viewed in a light most favorable to the nonmoving
party. Craig v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 252, 260 (2002);
Dahlstrom v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 812, 821 (1985); Jacklin v.
Commissioner, 79 T.C. 340, 344 (1982). The party opposing
summary judgment must set forth specific facts which show that a
question of genuine material fact exists and may not rely merely
on allegations or denials in the pleadings. See Grant Creek
Water Works, Ltd. v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 322, 325 (1988);
Casanova Co. v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 214, 217 (1986). On the
basis of respondent’s concessions, as noted above, the sole
dispute is whether the distribution is subject to a 10-percent
additional tax.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011