Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 492 FSUPP 848 - Black v. State of Mo.

Black v. State of Mo.’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
4
states following
January 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably James J. Kevlik v. David B. Goldstein, Town of Derry (1984), 710 F. Supp. 1407 - County of Suffolk v. Long Island Lighting Co. (1989)

6 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

2301980199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1654

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Fisher v. United States · Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn. · County of Los Angeles v. Chavez-Salido

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. “(1) the movant party was previously represented by the attorney whose disqualification he seeks; (2) the matters embraced within the pending suit are substantially related to the matters of the cause of action for which the attorney previously represented the movant party; and (3) the attorney is representing an adversary of the movant party in the pending suit.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A lawyer should preserve the confidences and secrets of a client.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. ““Disqualification of counsel, like other reaches for perfection, is tempered by a need to balance a variety of competing considerations and complex concepts. Disqualification in spasm reaction to every situation capable of appearing improper to the jaundiced cynic is as goal-defeating as failure to disqualify in blind disregard of flagrant conflicts of interest. Between those ethical extremes lie less obvious influences on the interest of society in the orderly administration of justice, on the interest of clients in candid consultation and choice of counsel, and on the interest of the legal profession in its reputational soul. “So, too, the judicial effort to light a disqualification path is unlikely to result in an early formulation of rules universally applicable to the Canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Rigid rules can be sterile and lacking in universal application. At the same time, an ‘every case on its own facts’ approach can be facile and unhelpful. Ethical experience is the key. Until more is gained, rigidity may be feasible at the far ends of the ethics spectrum, while flexibility governed by facts must reign in a gradually diminishing area between those extremes.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.