Legal Opinion
Baimbridge v. United States
District Court, S.D. California
Decided June 30, 2004No. 3:03-cr-00939PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART THE GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
GONZALEZ, District Judge.
Presently before the court is defendant-counterclaimant the United States of America’s (the “government”) motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. For the reasons stated herein, the Court grants the motion in part and denies it in part.
BACKGROUND
This case arises out of a series of tax penalties assessed against plaintiff-coun-terdefendant Horace Wayne Baimbridge (“Baimbridge”) for failure to collect and remit payroll taxes on behalf of Soil…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Joseph F. Purcell, Plaintiff-Counter-Claim-Defendant-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Dan O. Davis, Plaintiff-Counter-Claim-Defendant-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Wallace L. Sorenson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Schroer v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2009