- 10 -
the benefit of all reasonable doubt, and the material submitted
by both sides must be viewed in the light most favorable to the
opposing party; that is, all doubts as to the existence of an
issue of material fact must be resolved against the movant.
E.g., Adickes v. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970); Dreher v.
Sielaff, 636 F.2d 1141, 1143 n.4 (7th Cir. 1980); Kroh v.
Commissioner, 98 T.C. at 390.
In the instant case, respondent has not filed any cross-
motion for partial summary judgment. Where, as in the instant
case, only one side has moved for summary judgment, there is
implicit in the movant’s obligations as to material facts that
the movant has to persuade the Court that she has correctly
identified what facts are material. Elect. Arts, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 226, 238 (2002).
Respondent “strongly agrees with the material facts
surrounding the narrow issue that petitioner presents in her
motion.”
We proceed to consider whether partial summary judgment for
petitioner may be rendered as a matter of law. Our understanding
of what are the material facts affects our conclusions as to how
the law applies.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007