Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 274 KAN 336 - In re Berry

In re Berry’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2024

7 state decisions

40200220102020decided

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 In Re Carson · State v. Zeigler · State v. Klassen · In Re Jones · In Re Farmer

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

  1. ““The hearing panel’s recommendations of sanctions in a given case are ‘advisory only and shall not prevent the Court from imposing sanctions greater or lesser than those recommended by the panel or the Disciplinary Administrator.’ Rule 212(f) (2001 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 265). In determining the appropriate discipline to be imposed for a violation of disciplinary rules, we consider the facts surrounding the violation as well as any aggravating or mitigating circumstances. State v. Stakes, 227 Kan. 711, 720 , 608 P.2d 997 (1980).” In re Berry, 274 Kan. 336, 353-54 , 50 P.3d 20 (2002).”
    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.