Legal Opinion
Christensen v. United States
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided March 19, 1990No. Civ. A. 88-5075(SSB)PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BROTMAN, District Judge.
Currently before the court is the motion of pro se plaintiffs Tom and Jean Christensen for summary judgment. The defendant, the United States of America, has cross-moved for summary judgment. For the reasons stated in the following opinion, this court will deny plaintiffs’ motion and grant the government’s motion.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
Plaintiffs initiated this suit in November 1988 by filing a complaint and an application for a temporary restraining order. Plaintiffs alleged that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS” or “Service”) had failed to follow the proper…
2Cases cited45 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Phillips v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Michael J. Geiselman v. United States of America, Michael J. Geiselman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- Tilley v. United StatesDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2003
- Greenhouse v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1991
- Watts v. Internal Revenue ServiceDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1996
- Matter of RosemillerUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · 1995
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.