Legal Opinion

Rhoades, McKee, & Boer v. United States

District Court, W.D. Michigan

Decided January 7, 1994No. 1:91:CV:540Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ENSLEN, District Judge.

The matter before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration of this Court’s denial of their motion to recover reasonable litigation costs. 846 F.Supp. 565 (1993). Though they do not specify the Rule of Civil Procedure which permits their motion, I presume plaintiffs proceed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1).

Plaintiffs’ original motion argued that they were “prevailing parties,” and were therefore entitled to recover their litigation costs pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7430. In addition to other criteria, § 7430(c)(4)(i) defines a “prevailing party” as one which…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Vinson & Elkins, J. Evans Attwell, Tax Matters Partner v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
  3. RHOADES, McKEE, AND BOER v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API