Barrett v. Gagnon’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 2015
16 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 Doe v. State · Gravel v. Alaskan Village, Inc. · Klockenbrink v. State · Benson v. Benson · Mead v. State
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“From the facts previously alluded to, it is clear that only two months had elapsed between the filing of Barrett’s complaint, Gagnon’s counterclaim and the September 5, 1972 trial date setting. Further, the record shows that Barrett had a limited time within which to respond to her attorney’s withdrawal motion. Barrett received notice of this motion on the evening of September 1, which was a Friday. The following Monday was a legal holiday, and on Tuesday, September 5, the superior court heard the motion for withdrawal. . . . The trial lasted only one day with Barrett acting as her own counsel. Review of the transcript of the trial proceedings indicates that Barrett was seriously prejudiced by having to appear pro se. In light of the particular facts of this case, we think that the trial court abused its discretion in denying appellant’s request for a continuance after it had approved the motion to withdraw as counsel submitted by appellant’s attorney. The reason for counsel’s withdrawal was adequately explained, and the diligence of appellant in attempting to secure new counsel was manifest, [footnote omitted] 516 P.2d at 1203-04 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Burleson v. State“if the withdrawal of counsel on the eve of trial were to be regarded as a compelling ground for granting a continuance, then all a party would have to do in order to delay matters would be to discharge his attorney, [footnotes omitted] 516 P.2d at 1203 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Burleson v. State“'no dili gence in inducing counsel to remain in the case or in securing new counsel is disclosed,'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sarah D. v. John D.
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.