Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 40 N.J. 588 - In Re Kamp

In Re Kamp’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
4
states following
January 2003
most recently cited

2 district · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently January 2003 · most notably Reardon v. Marlayne, Inc. (1980), 93 Md. App. 337 - Homa v. Friendly Mobile Manor, Inc. (1992)

2 district · 44 state decisions

16019631970198019902000decided

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 Greenberg · In Re Rothman · In Re LR · In Re ABC

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

  1. “"Furthermore, if dual representation does occur, fidelity to the Code of Professional Responsibility and prudent concern for legitimate self-interest against possible liability dictate that full disclosure be made of the possible dangers involved and that the legal representation be fundamentally fair to both sides. The requirements of full disclosure were spelled out in In re Kamp, [40 N. J. 588, 595-96, 194 A.2d 236, 240 (1963)] in terms not inappropriate to the instant case: 'Full disclosure requires the attorney not only to inform the prospective client of the attorney’s relationship to the seller, but also to explain in detail the pitfalls that may arise in the course of the transaction which would make it desirable that the buyer have independent counsel. The full signiGcance of the representation of conGicting interests should be disclosed to the client so that he may make an intelligent decision before giving his consent. If the attorney cannot properly represent the buyer in all aspects of the transaction because of his relationship to the seller, full disclosure requires that he inform the buyer of the limited scope of his intended representation of the buyer’s interests and point out the advantages of the buyer’s retaining independent counsel.’ ” Crest Investment Trust, Inc., 23 Md.App. at 303 , 327 A.2d at 905 (some emphasis in original) (some emphasis deleted) (some emphasis added).”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““In observing the admonition of Canon 6 to avoid the representation of conflicting interests, the lawyer must have in mind not only the avoidance of a relation which will obviously and presently involve the duty to contend for one client what his duty to the other presently requires him to oppose, but also the probability or possibility that such a situation will develop.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““It is unprofessional to represent conflicting interests, except by express consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. Within the meaning of this canon, a lawyer represents conflicting interests when, in behalf of one client, it is his duty to contend for that which duty to another client requires him to oppose.””
    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.