Carmelo Montalbano - Page 5
- 5 -
Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and
avoid unnecessary and expensive trials. Fla. Peach Corp. v.
Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988). Summary judgment may be
granted where there is no genuine issue of any material fact, and
a decision may be rendered as a matter of law. Rule 121(a) and
(b); see Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 518, 520
(1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994); Zaentz v.
Commissioner, 90 T.C. 753, 754 (1988). The moving party bears
the burden of proving that there is no genuine issue of material
fact, and factual inferences will be read in a manner most
favorable to the party opposing summary judgment. Dahlstrom v.
Commissioner, 85 T.C. 812, 821 (1985); Jacklin v. Commissioner,
79 T.C. 340, 344 (1982). When a motion for summary judgment is
made and properly supported, the adverse party may not rest upon
mere allegations or denials of the pleadings but must set forth
specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.
Collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of any issue of
fact or law that was actually litigated and necessarily
determined by a valid and final judgment. Montana v. United
States, 440 U.S. 147, 153 (1979). It is well established that a
final criminal judgment for tax evasion under section 7201
collaterally estops relitigation of the issue of fraudulent
intent in a subsequent proceeding over the civil fraud penalty.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Last modified: March 27, 2008