Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 814 A2D 304 - In Re Eagen

In Re Eagen’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
2
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

13 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on In Re Melograne · In Re Sullivan · In Re Larsen

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

  1. “Unlike a criminal case in which the range of penalties is determined by the number of charges and the statutory sentence mandated for each offense upon which there is a finding of guilt, the scope of sanctions available to this Court is not so circumscribed. Any finding by this Court, that a judicial officer has violated the Constitution of Pennsylvania or the Code of Judicial Conduct subjects that judge to the full range of appropriate discipline. Furthermore, in exercising our discretion in imposing disciplinary sanction, we are guided not by the number of ways the Respondent’s conduct has offended the Constitution or Code, but by the nature of the conduct itself and any mitigating or aggravating circumstances.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(b) Justices and judges shall not engage in any activity prohibited by law ....”
    3 later decisions 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.