Rosemary S. Kovacs v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1994)
green
· 130 citation events
across 24 courts.
Showing the 13 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199420102026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
yellow
Verner v. Reno (1998)
But see Gniadek v. Hurst, 25 F.3d 1048 (6th Cir. 1994) (Table) (holding that failure to file timely appeal of Parole Commission decision constituted procedural default of administrative remedy).
Table
But see Gniadek v. Hurst, 25 F.3d 1048 (6th Cir.1994) (Table) (holding that failure to file timely appeal of Parole Commission decision constituted procedural default of administrative remedy).
green
(PC) Gallegos v. Bruce (2025)
Lukovsky, 535 25 F.3d at 1048; Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 927 (2004); Fink, 192 F.3d at 914.
green
Gallegos v. Bruce (2025)
Lukovsky, 535 25 F.3d at 1048; Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 927 (2004); Fink, 192 F.3d at 914.
green
(HC) Alford v. Thompson (2024)
Alaimalo, 645 25 F.3d at 1048.
green
Yanez v. HL Welding, Inc. (2022)
Vizcaino, 290 25 F.3d at 1048-49.
green
Gilles v. Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc. (2021)
Cf. Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 25 F.3d 1048 , 1052 (9th Cir. 2003) (“Dismissal with prejudice and without leave to amend is 26 not appropriate unless it is clear . . . that the complaint could not be saved by 27 1 |}amendment.”); Fed.
“Dismissal with prejudice and without leave to amend is 26 not appropriate unless it is clear . . . that the complaint could not be saved by 27 1 |}amendment.”
green
Redus v. Revenue Cycle Service Center, LLC (2025)
See also Holobaugh v. State of Tenn., 25 F.3d 1048 (6th Cir. 1994) (stating that a “plaintiff's bald denial of wrongdoing [i]s insufficient evidence to establish pretext”).
stating that a “plaintiff's bald denial of wrongdoing [i]s insufficient evidence to establish pretext”
green
Browning v. Franklin Precision Industry, Inc. (2023)
In other words, “a plaintiff’s subjective interpretations or feelings are insufficient to establish pretext.” Rosenthal v. Faygo Beverages, Inc., 701 F. App’x 472, 480 (6th Cir. 2017) (citation omitted); see also Holobaugh v. Tennessee, 25 F.3d 1048 , 1994 WL 252883, at *3 (6th Cir. 1994) (unpublished table decision) (“[T]he plaintiff’s bald denial of wrongdoing [i]s insufficient evidence to establish pretext.” (citing Mitchell v. Toledo Hosp., 964 F.2d 577, 583 (6th Cir. 19…
unpublished table decision
green
D'Augusta v. American Petroleum Institute (2023)
See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). “[T]he consideration of prejudice to 24 the opposing party … carries the greatest weight.” Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 25 F.3d 1048 , 1052 (9th Cir.2003).
green
Shorter v. Magneti Marelli of Tennessee, LLC (2020)
In other words, “a plaintiff's subjective interpretations or feelings are insufficient to establish pretext.” Rosenthal v. Faygo Beverages, Inc., 701 F. App’x 472, 480 (6th Cir. 2017); see also, Holobaugh v. State of Tenn., 25 F.3d 1048 (6th Cir. 1994) (stating that a “plaintiff's bald denial of wrongdoing [i]s insufficient evidence to establish pretext”).
stating that a “plaintiff's bald denial of wrongdoing [i]s insufficient evidence to establish pretext”
green
High v. Comm'r (2011)
See Kovacs v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 124 , 128-130 (1993) , affd. without published opinion 25 F.3d 1048 (6th Cir. 1994) .
green
Hollins v. Apfel (2001)
See also Gieseking v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 25 F.3d 1048 , 1994 WL 228239 *7 (6th Cir.1994) (unpublished).