Daniel M. Pilla and Jerome Daly v. The American Bar Association’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 1 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 104 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2021 · most notably Rowland v. California Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory Council (1993), United States v. Will (1980)
44 federal appellate · 1 district · 20 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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 Evans v. Gore · 407 F. Supp. 451 - Turner v. American Bar Ass'n · Millslagle v. Olson · Kinney v. Plymouth Rock Squab Co.
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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“where all are disqualified, none are disqualified”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“named as defendants The American Bar Association, the Chief Justice of the United States and four of the eight Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United states, all of the circuit judges, including senior circuit judges of this circuit, practically all of the district judges of this circuit, members of the Supreme Court of Minnesota and other defendants too numerous to mention.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. (b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances: (1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentia-ry facts concerning the proceeding; (2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Norton
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.