John Alfred Laszloffy - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          frivolous arguments in which he contested his income tax                    
          liabilities and the validity of the assessments against him.                
               On June 17, 2005, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to                
          petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action           
          (notice of determination) in which respondent’s Appeals Office              
          sustained respondent’s proposed levy action.                                
               Petitioner timely petitioned this Court to review the above            
          notice of determination.                                                    

                                     Discussion                                       
               Summary judgment is proper “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); Beery           
          v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 184, 187 (2004).                                  
               A party opposing a motion for summary judgment “may not rest           
          upon the mere allegations or denials of such party’s pleading,”             
          but the objecting party’s response “must set forth specific facts           
          showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.”  Rule 121(d);             
          Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).                         
               The burden of establishing the nonexistence of a genuine               
          issue of fact is on the party moving for summary judgment.                  
          Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970).                      







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011