Ligon v. Price’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Ligon v. Stewart (2007), Ligon v. Newman (2006)
26 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 In Re Wilson · Wilson v. Neal · 49 Cal. 3d 239 - In Re Lamb · Neal v. Hollingsworth · Matter of Greenberg
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The misconduct involves the misappropriation of funds; (2) The misconduct results in or is likely to result in substantial prejudice to a client or other person; (3) The misconduct involves dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or misrepresentation by the lawyer; (4) The misconduct is part of a pattern of similar misconduct; (5) The lawyer’s prior record of public sanctions demonstrates a substantial disregard of the lawyer’s professional duties and responsibilities; or (6) The misconduct constitutes a “Serious Crime” as defined in these Procedures.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ligon v. Newman · Ligon v. Dunklin“(1) absence of a prior disciplinary record; (2) absence of a dishonest or selfish motive; ' (3) personal or emotional problems; (4) timely good faith effort to make restitution or to rectify the consequences of the misconduct; (5) full and free disclosure to the disciplinary board or cooperative attitude towards the proceedings; (6) inexperience in the practice of law; (7) character or reputation; (8) physical disability; (9) mental disability or chemical dependency including alcoholism or drug abuse when: (a) there is medical evidence that the respondent is affected by a chemical dependency or mental disability; (b) the chemical dependency or mental disability caused the misconduct; (c) the respondent’s recovery from the chemical dependency or mental disability is demonstrated by a meaningful and sustained period of successful rehabilitation; and (d) the recovery arrested the misconduct and recurrence of that misconduct is unlikely. 112(10) delay in [the] disciplinary proceedings; (11) impositions of other penalties or sanctions; (12) remorse; (13) remoteness of prior offenses.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ligon v. Newman · Ligon v. Tapp“(1) prior disciplinary offenses; (2) dishonest or selfish motive; (3) a pattern of misconduct; (4) multiple offenses; (5) bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary proceedings by intentionally failing to comply with these Procedures or orders of the Committee; (6) submission of false evidence, false statements, or other deceptive practices during the disciplinary process; |n(7) refusal to acknowledge the wrongful nature of the conduct; (8) vulnerability of the victim; (9) substantial experience in the practice of law; (10) indifference to making restitution; and (11) illegal conduct, including that involving the use of controlled substances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ligon v. Newman · Ligon v. Tapp
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.