In re Albin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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

1. ““In disciplinary matters, we have a duty to examine the evidence and determine for ourselves the judgment to be entered. Although the report of the disciplinary panel is advisory only, it will be given the same dignity as a special verdict by a jury, or the findings of a trial court, and will be adopted where amply sustained by die evidence, or where it is not against the clear weight of the evidence, or where the evidence consisted of sharply conflicting testimony. See In re Carson, 252 Kan. 399, 406 , 845 P.2d 47 (1993); In re Farmer, 242 Kan. 296, 299 , 747 P.2d 97 (1987); State v. Zeigler, 217 Kan. 748, 755 , 538 P.2d 643 (1975); State v. Klassen, 207 Kan. 414, 415 , 485 P.2d 1295 (1971). We apply these rules in considering the evidence, the findings of the panel, and the arguments of the parties in making our determination of whether violations of KRPC exist, and, if they do, deciding upon the appropriate discipline to be imposed. In re Berg, 264 Kan. 254, 269 , 955 P.2d 1240 (1998).” In re Albin, 267 Kan. at 452 . “Supreme Court Rule 211(f) (1997 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 224) provides in applicable part: ‘To warrant a finding of misconduct the charges must be established by clear and convincing evidence.’ Clear and convincing evidence is defined in Modem Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Cinderella Homes, Inc., 226 Kan. 70, 78 , 596 P.2d 816 (1979), to mean ‘the witnesses to a fact must be found to be credible; the facts to which the witness testifies must be distinctly remembered; t”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Zimmerman