Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 175 Ill. 2d 504 - In Re Rinella

175 Ill. 2d 504 - In Re Rinella’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
11
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 289 Ill. App. 3d 116 - Doe v. Roe (1997), In Re Berg (1998)

45 state decisions — followed in 11 states

220199720002010decided

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

Relies on 101 Ill. 2d 535 - In Re Levin · 132 Ill. 2d 507 - In Re Gerard · 68 Ill. 2d 49 - In Re Stillo · 124 Ill. 2d 29 - In Re Corboy · 157 Ill. 2d 178 - In Re Timpone

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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““This Court has noted that the Hearing Board is in a superior position to resolve factual disputes. The Hearing Board’s findings regarding the credibility of witnesses, the resolution of conflicting testimony, and any other fact-finding judgments are entitled to great deference. [Citation.] This is due to the fact that the Hearing Board is able to observe the witnesses’ demeanor and judge their credibility. [Citation.] Thus, the Hearing Board’s factual determinations will generally not be disturbed unless they are against the manifest weight of the evidence.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Initially, we reject respondent's contention that attorney misconduct is sanctionable only when it is specifically proscribed by a disciplinary rule. On the contrary, the standards of professional conduct enunciated by this court are not a manual designed to instruct attorneys what to do in every conceivable situation.... [W]e do not believe that respondent, or any other member of the bar, could reasonably have considered the conduct involved here to be acceptable behavior under the rules governing the legal profession.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.