Nelson I. and Esther S. Goodman - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          Respondent’s Direct Communication With Petitioners                          
               Petitioners’ attorney, in petitioners’ objection to                    
          respondent’s motion, complains that respondent’s counsel served             
          the motion for summary judgment directly on petitioners without             
          providing him with a copy or notice of the motion.  The issue,              
          along with similar complaints he raised at the hearing, is                  
          irrelevant to a decision on the motion for summary judgment, and            
          is also inappropriate.  Mr. Tropper did not enter his appearance            
          in this case until December 28, 2005; petitioners were pro sese             
          until that time.  The motion for summary judgment was filed                 
          November 10, 2005.  By Court Rule, papers and documents are                 
          generally served on the parties unless there is counsel of                  
          record.  Rule 21(a) and (b)(2); see also Rule 24(b).                        
                                     Conclusion                                       
               Petitioners have failed to show that there is a genuine                
          issue of material fact for trial, and respondent’s motion for               
          summary judgment will be granted.                                           


                                             An appropriate order and                 
                                        decision will be entered granting             
                                        respondent’s motion for summary               
                                        judgment.                                     









Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  

Last modified: May 25, 2011