Phipps v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis
186 F.2d 748 · 1951
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently October 2009
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
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 Wall · Bute v. People of State of Illinois · People Ex Rel. Chicago Bar Ass'n v. Goodman · Montgomery County Bar Ass'n v. Rinalducci · In Re Needham
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An attorney is an officer of the court before which he has been admitted to practice. The power to discipline or disbar such officer for unprofessional conduct is inherent in the court, and exists independent of statute, (citing Illinois authorities) As to disbarment, due process requires only that an attorney have reasonable notice of the charges against him and a reasonable opportunity to be heard in his defense. Ex parte Wall, 107 U.S. 265, 271 , 2 S.Ct. 569 , 27 L.Ed. 552 . The form of notice and the form and manner of hearing are left to the sound discretion of the court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““As the . . . [record] shows that . . . [respondent] was apprized of the charges filed against him, and that he had a reasonable opportunity to defend thereagainst, the procedure complained against did not violate a scheme of ordered liberty or a deep rooted principle of justice. In other words, we find that [respondent] was not denied federal due process of law. “Neither the propriety of the designation by the Supreme Court of Illinois of committees of the Chicago Bar Association to act as commissioners in disciplinary proceedings, nor the claim that such committees were prejudiced against the . . . [respondent] herein raises a substantial federal question.” Phipps v. Wilson, 186 F.2d 748, 752 (7th Cir. 1951). 9”
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.