Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 266 Kan. 664 - In Re Long

In Re Long’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
July 2008
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on In re Jantz · In Re Betts · In Re Betts · In Re Durr · In re Jackson

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

  1. ““We suggest to the members of the bar of this state who have the misfortune to appear before the Disciplinary Board and to the attorneys who represent those individuals that they read with care the Internal Operating Rules of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys, and in particular I.O. Rule E.8 (1998 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 272). . . . “We suggest to counsel that it is imperative that the plan be put into place at the earliest possible moment and submitted to the hearing panel for its consideration and ‘fine tuning’ before the panel concludes the hearing. Counsel should not wait until oral argument before the panel or the Supreme Court to come forth with a plan and medical evidence.” 266 Kan. at 667.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “clear and convincing evidence supports the hearing panel's findings”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “substantial competent evidence of a clear and convincing nature.”
    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.