JAMES PHILLIP ERICKSON, D/B/A WIT'S END, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a party opposing summary judgment must present specific facts, not just allegations, to avoid judgment.
Appellant was held liable for cabaret taxes under the Internal Revenue Code. The trial court granted summary judgment against the appellant.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Internal Revenue Code Of 1954 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant complains of the action of the trial court in granting motion for summary judgment holding the appellant liable for cabaret taxes under §§ 4231(6) and 4232(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. It seems appropriate to state that a party opposing summary judgment may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials in his pleadings to avoid the granting of such a judgment otherwise justified. F.R.Civ. P. 56.1
Our review of the record convinces us that the District Court reached the correct conclusion. Erickson v. United States, D.C., 228 F.Supp. 421 (1963). The judgment is affirmed.
. Tlie pertinent provision of Rule 56(e) is as follows:
“ * * * When a motion for summary-judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of Ms pleading, but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against him. As amended Jan. 21, 1963, eff. July 1, 1963.”
See also Dressler v. MV Sandpiper, 331 F. 2d 130, (2 Cir. 1964).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Smith Indus., Inc., 403 F.2d 889 (5th Cir. 1968)
-
Scarboro v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp., 364 F.2d 10 (5th Cir. 1966)
Authorities Cited
- Dressler v. The MV Sandpiper, 331 F.2d 130 (2d Cir. 1964)