Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 542 A2D 1242 - In Re Sandground

In Re Sandground’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
January 2010
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently January 2010

21 state decisions

1201988199020002010decided

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 In Re Reback · In Re Hutchinson · Matter of Haupt · Matter of Smith · In Re Rosen

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

  1. “We might consider Sandground’s inconsistent positions before the Board to be an aggravating factor, but defer to the Board's treatment of this matter.” Id. at 1247-48 n. 10. 10 . The client’s wife found the secret agreement in her husband's papers after new counsel had taken over for Sandground. Id. 11 . Sandground advised his client to reveal the funds at any deposition. Id. at 1245 . 12 . In Sandground , the Hearing Committee did not accept in full Bar Counsel’s position that there was a preconceived conspiracy to conceal the information, finding only that Sandground”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the nature of the violation, [(2)] the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, [(3)] the need to protect the public, the courts, and the legal profession,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Sandground's knowing participation went to the heart of the controversy between [his client] and his wife and threatened to defraud [the wife].”
    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.