Alioto

Alioto v. United States

Good Law
593 F. Supp. 1402·39 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 1386·54 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5753·1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24441
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 9, 1984C-81-2143 RPA, C-82-0475 RPA and C-82-0919 RPACalifornia8,427 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aguilar, J.

OPINION AND ORDER

The above-captioned cases all revolve around the bankruptcy of the Pacific Far East Lines (hereinafter “PFEL”) and the company’s non-payment of payroll taxes withheld during the fourth quarter of 1977 and the first quarter of 1978. On November 10, 1983, the Court heard argument on a number of motions for summary judgment. Since the hearing, the Court has re-read the written arguments of counsel and has reviewed the documents submitted in connection with the motions. Based on these arguments and documents, and upon consideration of the relevant authorities, the Court hereby enters the following Opinion and Order addressing all of the motions before the Court.

I. Summary Judgment

Summary judgment is warranted where there is no genuine dispute as to a material fact and the moving party is entitled to prevail as a matter of law. Ybarra v. Reno Thunderbird Mobile Home Village, 723 F.2d 675, 677 (9th Cir.1984). In considering a motion for summary judgment, courts must view facts and draw inferences in the manner most favorable to the non-moving party. United States v. Diebold Inc., 369 U.S. 654, 655 , 82 S.Ct. 993, 994 , 8 L.Ed.2d 176 (1962); Retail Clerks Union…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.