- 4 -
The motion asks that we grant partial summary judgment that
(1) Countryside’s liquidating distribution to Mr. Winn and Mr.
Curtis in 2000 did not result in “a taxable event that gave rise
to * * * [income recognized to] Countryside or any of its
partners during 2000” and (2) “there is no adjustment to income,
gain, loss, deduction, or credit of Countryside or any of its
partners for 2000 arising from Countryside.”
A hearing on the motion (the hearing) was held in
Washington, D.C., on August 15, 2006.
Background
Summary Judgment
A summary judgment is appropriate “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). A
summary adjudication may be made upon part of the issues in
controversy. Rule 121(a). In response to a motion for summary
judgment or partial summary judgment, “an adverse party may not
rest upon the mere allegations or denials of such party’s
pleading, but such party’s response, by affidavits or as
otherwise provided in this Rule, must set forth specific facts
showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.” Rule 121(d).
Facts on Which We Rely
On or about September 10, 1993, Countryside was formed as a
Massachusetts limited partnership to acquire, finance, own,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008