In Re Borders’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently July 2018
17 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1028 (Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998) · 18 U.S.C. § 1963 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Louisiana v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission · In Re Roundtree · In Re McBride · United States v. William A. Borders · Matter of Kerr
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the nature and circumstances of the misconduct for which the attorney was disciplined; (2) whether the attorney recognizes the seriousness of the misconduct; (3) the attorney’s conduct since discipline was imposed, including the steps taken to remedy past wrongs and prevent future ones; (4) the attorney’s present character; and (5) the attorney’s present qualifications and competence to practice law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. In Re Fogel“(1) [t]hat [he] has the moral qualifications, competency, and learning in law required for readmission; and (2) [t]hat [his] resumption of the practice of law ... will not be detrimental to the integrity and standing of the Bar, or to the administration of justice, or subversive to the public interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Fogel“very difficult for the Bar to have confidence that he will not do the same thing again”) (internal quotation omitted). 9 . In Bettis, supra, we concluded that the petitioner’s evidence of his present good character”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Fogel
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.