Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 UT 96 - Pendleton v. Utah State Bar

Pendleton v. Utah State Bar’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Cruz v. Middlekauff Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. · Bailey v. Utah State Bar · In Re Integration & Governance of the Utah State Bar

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

  1. “`We review the ... denial of [the Helmses'] motion to dismiss for correctness, granting no deference to the district court's ruling.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “accept the factual allegations in the complaint as true and draw all reasonable inferences from those facts in a light most favorable to [the] plaintiff.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The Utah Constitution grants exclusive power to this court to 'govern the practice of law. ...'”
    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.