Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 625 F.2d 433 - Armstrong v. McAlpin

Armstrong v. McAlpin’s Empirical Analysis

625 F.2d 433 · 1980

Citation profile

237
cited by 237 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
December 2020
most recently cited

85 federal appellate · 14 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 237 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2020 · most notably Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord (1981), Armstrong v. McAlpin (1983)

85 federal appellate · 14 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 14 states

159019801990200020102020decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 207 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1912

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Faretta v. California · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Abney v. United States

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

  1. “(1) where an attorney’s conflict of interests in violation of Canons 5 and 9 of the Code of Professional Responsibility undermines the court’s confidence in the vigor of the attorney’s representation of his client, ... or more commonly (2) where the attorney is at least potentially in a position to use privileged information concerning the other side through prior representation, for example, in violation of Canons 4 and 9, thus giving his present client an unfair advantage.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “If a lawyer is required to decline employment or to withdraw from employment under a Disciplinary Rule, no partner, or associate, or any other lawyer affiliated with him or his firm, may accept or continue such employment.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “[Pjossible ethical conflicts surfacing during a litigation are generally better addressed by the comprehensive disciplinary machinery of the state and federal bar.”) (quotations omitted), vacated on other grounds, 449 U.S. 1106, 101 S.Ct. 911, 66 L.Ed.2d 835 (1981); W.T. Grant Co. v. Haines, 531 F.2d 671, 677 (2d Cir.1976) (If counsel”
    6 later decisions 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.