In Re Gansler’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. “(1) The procedure elsewhere was so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation of due process; or (2) There was such infirmity of proof establishing the misconduct as to give rise to the clear conviction that the Court could not, consistently with its duty, accept as final the conclusion on that subject; or (3) The imposition of the same discipline by the Court would result in grave injustice; or (4) The misconduct established warrants substantially different discipline in the District of Columbia; or (5) The misconduct elsewhere does not constitute misconduct in the District of Columbia.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Beattie

2. “Bar Counsel’s novel argument that the choice of law principles of Rule 8.5 ... apply in reciprocal discipline proceedings and foreclose any inquiry whether Gan-sler’s conduct would amount to misconduct in this jurisdiction” left to another case where reciprocal case presented no issue as to the exception in D.C. Bar § 11(c)(5)) (emphasis in original). 10 . Virginia Rule 3.1(a)(1) forbids lawyers from “knowingly mak[ing] a false statement to a tribunal.” Its District of Columbia counterpart, D.C. Rule 3.3(a)(1), prohibits”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Beattie