To succeed on a Civ.R. 56(C) motion for summary judgment, the movant must demonstrate: (1) that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact; (2) that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; (3) that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion, and that conclusion is adverse to the party against whom the motion for summary judgment is made, who is entitled to have the evidence construed most strongly in his favor." Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co. (1978), 54 Ohio St. 2d 64, 66, 375 N.E.2d 46. It is the moving party's burden to delineate with specificity the basis upon which the motion is brought, Mitseff v. Wheeler (1988), 38 Ohio St. 3d 112, 526 N.E.2d 798, syllabus, and identify those portions of the record which demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Dresher v. Burt (1996), 75 Ohio St. 3d 280, 293, 662 N.E.2d 264. "When a properly supported motion for summary judgment is made, an adverse party may not rest on mere allegations or denials in the pleading, but must respond with specific facts showing the existence of a genuine issue of material fact." See Grob v. Justice, Ohio (1966) Lucas App. No. L-95-223, citing Civ.R. 56(E); Riley v. Montgomery (1984), 11 Ohio St. 3d 75, 79, 463 N.E.2d 1246. Civ.R. 56(C) states: "Summary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, written admissions, affidavits, transcripts of evidence, and written stipulations of fact, if any, timely filed in the action, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. No evidence or stipulation may be considered except as stated in this rule. a summary judgment shall not be rendered unless it appears from the evidence or stipulation, and only from the evidence or stipulation, that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the party against whom the motion for summary judgment is made, that party being entitled to have the evidence or stipulation construed most strongly in the party's favor." "The main purpose of the summary judgment procedure is to enable a party to go behind the allegations in the pleadings and assess the proof in order to see whether there is a genuine need for trial. The remedy should be applied sparingly and only in those cases where the justice of its application is unusually clear. Resolving issues of credibility or reconciling ambiguities and conflicts in witness testimony is outside the province of a summary judgment hearing." In reviewing a motion for summary judgment, the court must construe the evidence and all reasonable inferences drawn therefrom in a light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Morris v. Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. (1988), 35 Ohio St. 3d 45, 47, 517 N.E.2d 904, 907; Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co. (1978), 54 Ohio St. 2d 64, 66, 8 Ohio Op. 3d 73, 74, 375 N.E.2d 46, 47.