In re R. M. J.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

237 federal appellate · 120 district · 309 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 1,011 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Truthful advertising related to lawful activities is entitled to the protections of the First Amendment. But when the particular content or method of the advertising suggests that it is inherently misleading or when experience has proved that in fact such advertising is subject to abuse, the States may impose appropriate restrictions. Misleading advertising may be prohibited entirely.”

   74 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio · Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Assn.

2. “In commercial speech cases ... a four-part analysis has developed. At the outset, we must determine whether the expression is protected by the First Amendment. For commercial speech to come within that provision, it at least must concern lawful activity and not be misleading. Next, we ask whether the asserted governmental interest is substantial. If both inquiries yield positive answers, we must determine whether the regulation directly advances the governmental interest asserted, and whether it is not more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. · American Academy of Pain Management v. Joseph

3. “"Temporary DR 2-101 Communications Concerning A Lawyer's Services "A lawyer shall not make or cause to be made a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services. A communication is false or misleading if it: "(A) contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading; "(B) is likely to create an unjustified expectation about results the lawyer can achieve, or states or implies that the lawyer can achieve results by means that violate the rules of professional conduct or other law; or "(C) compares the quality of the lawyer's services with the quality of other lawyers' services, except as provided in Temporary DR 2-104." "Temporary DR 2-104 Communication of Fields of Practice "A lawyer may communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not practice in particular fields of law. A lawyer shall not state or imply that the lawyer is a specialist except as follows: "(A) A lawyer admitted to engage in patent practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office may use the designation `patent attorney' or a substantially similar designation;. . . ."”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 177 N.C. App. 89 - North Carolina State Bar v. Culbertson · Howell v. Alabama State Bar