In Re Reback’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

31 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Our opinions show that attorneys will be held not only to have been neglectful but also to have intentionally failed to seek the client’s lawful objectives if the attorneys were demonstrably aware of the neglect or if their neglect was so pervasive that they must have been aware of it.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Foster · In Re Delate

2. “Rosemary Lewis retained the firm of Reback and Parsons to pursue her divorce claim. While Reback was the only attorney to whom Lewis ever sjboke, Parsons took responsibility for the case. He filed a verified complaint in the Superior Court. Some months later, the court issued a warning notice pursuant to Super.Ct. Dom.Rel.R. 41(f), which provides that a case that is not at issue within six months after its filing date shall be dismissed after notice to the attorneys. Owing apparently to a defect in the firm’s case-handling procedures, neither Reback nor Parsons saw the notice. The case was dismissed without their knowledge. Shortly after the dismissal, Lewis’ brother telephoned Reback to inquire about the progress of the case. Reback and Parsons then discovered that the case had been dismissed. They did not tell Lewis or her brother. Instead, they prepared a second complaint, identical in substance to the first. The second complaint purported to be verified by Lewis. Instead of obtaining Lewis’ signature, however, Reback signed Lewis’ name to the complaint in the presence of Parsons. One of the two lawyers — or a secretary acting at their direction — then had the complaint notarized. Whoever took the complaint to the notary necessarily represented that the signature was genuine. Parsons filed the complaint, knowing that the signature was false. The partners then assigned the case to an associate. They told the associate to come to them if he had questions. Other than giving h”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Reback

3. “substantive harm” as a result of their misconduct. Respondents’ actions were affirmatively and grossly prejudicial to the administration of justice, and on that basis alone they warrant severe sanctions. The fact that Mrs. Lewis was not injured is a lucky break for her, but it does not lessen the gravity of respondents’ breaches of the disciplinary code, nor should it serve to mitigate the penalty for those breaches. . This quotation is taken from part I of the division opinion, which the en banc court has now adopted as its own. Ante at 229. . "Concealment or suppression of a material fact is as fraudulent as a positive direct misrepresentation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Reback