Legal Opinion
Scott v. United States
District Court, D. Colorado
Decided December 29, 1988No. Civ. A. 87-B-1733PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BABCOCK, District Judge.
Pending before this court is the United States of America’s (the United States) motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim based on 26 U.S.C. § 6672 against Harry Scott (Scott) and J.H. Hambric (Hambric). Jurisdiction exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1).
The motion for summary judgment is granted in favor of the United States against Scott for the entire second and third quarters of 1982 and from October 1 through November 15 of the fourth quarter. The motion for summary judgment is granted in favor of the United States against…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Robert W. Monday v. United States of America, and Third-Party v. John A. Monday, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- Mazo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
- John A. Thibodeau v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1987
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Muck v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
- Carter v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- K.E. North, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Ronald P. Muck, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee v. Duane Kiskadden, Counter-DefendantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993