In Re A. and B.’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently November 2011 · most notably Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County v. Jelco Inc. (1981), In re Kelly (1968)
3 federal appellate · 27 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 Ahto v. Weaver · Virginia Construction Corp. v. Fairman
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... the attorney has the affirmative ethical responsibility immediately and fully to disclose his conflict of interest, to withdraw completely from representing both the municipality or agency and the private client with respect to such matter, and to recommend to the municipality or agency that it retain independent counsel, [at 334, 209 A.2d 101 ]”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he subject of land development is one in which the likelihood of transactions with a municipality and the room for public misunderstanding are so great that a member of the bar should not represent a developer operating in a municipality in which the member of the bar is the municipal attorney or the holder of any other municipal office of apparent influence. [ In re A. and B., 44 N.J. 331, 334 , 209 A. 2d 101 (1965) (emphasis added).]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Dual representation is particularly troublesome where one of the clients is a governmental body. So, an attorney may not represent both a governmental body and a private client merely because disclosure was made and they are agreeable that he represent both interests.”
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.