Standing Committee on Discipline of the United States District Court v. Ross’s Empirical Analysis
735 F.2d 1168 · 1984
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2016 · most notably State Bar of Nevada v. Claiborne (1988), United States v. Wunsch (1996)
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 11 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 28 U.S.C. § 1654 · 28 U.S.C. § 604
Relies on Polk County v. Dodson · Middlesex County Ethics Committee v. Garden State Bar Ass'n · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Bates v. State Bar of Arizona · In the Matter of John Ruffalo Jr
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'Any court which has the power to admit attorneys to practice may also sanction them for unprofessional conduct.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The nature of a disciplinary proceeding is neither civil nor criminal, but an investigation into the conduct of the lawyer-respondent.... In the federal system there is no uniform procedure for disciplinary proceedings. The individual judicial districts are free to define the rules to be followed and the grounds for punishment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he question before the court is whether an attorney may continue to practice a profession imbued with the public interest and trust. The court must consider both the fitness of one of its officers and the need to protect the public from an unqualified or unscrupulous practitioner.”
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.