Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 100 TC 124 - Kovacs v. Commissioner

Kovacs v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
August 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Robinson v. Commissioner (1994), Bagley v. Commissioner (1995)

6 federal appellate · 1 district ·

430199320002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Cannon v. University of Chicago · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · United States v. American Trucking Associations · Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. P Casey P Casey

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “compensation or satisfaction imposed by law for a wrong or injury”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Just compensation for the damage so suffered requires that the party damaged be made whole. An integral part of a payment for such purpose is interest covering the period of detention. In such a case [interest] is merely a convenient method of measuring the amount of one of the factors of damage. It is not a separable item of interest on an obligation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Since Riddle, the exclusion for personal injury damages has been reenacted and amended numerous times. Nevertheless, the statute continues to exclude only `damages' and omits any mention of `interest'. This implies a continuing acceptance by Congress of the existing interpretation of the exclusion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.