55 Wash. 2d 601 - Van Dyke v. White’s Empirical Analysis
1960
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably 105 Wash. 2d 381 - Tank v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. (1986), 85 Wash. 2d 372 - Oregon Automobile Insurance v. Salzberg (1975)
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 35 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 Coleman v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. · G. A. Stowers Furniture Co. v. American Indemnity Co. · Hilker v. Western Automobile Insurance · Anderson v. Eaton · Douglas v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he standards of the legal profession require undeviating fidelity of the lawyer to his client. No exceptions can be tolerated.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Ordinarily, there is no conflict of interest involved in such a situation because the insertion in the policy of a provision requiring the insured to permit the insurance company’s lawyer to defend claims insured against amounts to a consent in advance by the insured to the employment of an attorney by the insurance company to defend such claims. . . . Accordingly, in such cases the attorney represents two clients, the insured and the insurer, and he owes to both a high duty of care imposed by statute . . . and the rules governing professional conduct. . . . Insofar as the insured is concerned the attorney owes him the same obligations of good faith and fidelity as if he had retained the attorney personally. It sometimes happens, while such attorney is representing both the insured and the insurer, that a conflict of interest arises between his two clients. A conflict of interest between his two clients, however, does not necessarily require that the attorney withdraw from the case or that he terminate the relationship of attorney and client with the client whose interests would prevent the attorney from devoting his entire energies in that client’s behalf and to that client’s interests, although he may choose to do so. In California, an attorney may usually, under minimum standards of professional ethics, represent dual interests as long as full consent and full disclosure occur.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““It was the duty of plaintiff’s attorneys upon learning of the possible conflict of interests between plaintiff and defendant, to immediately notify defendant of this fact. Their failure to take such action can be attributed only to their desire to strengthen plaintiff’s position in preparation for the filing of the instant suit. It would be untenable under such circumstances to allow plaintiff to disclaim liability under the policy.” (Id. at 486-487.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.