Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 967 SO2D 482 - In re Brown

In re Brown’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
October 2010
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 459 So. 2d 520 - Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Whittington · 513 So. 2d 1173 - Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Reis · 633 So. 2d 150 - In Re Pardue · 683 So. 2d 714 - In Re Caulfield · 646 So. 2d 343 - In Re Quaid

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

  1. “The question of when ordinary legal malpractice becomes an ethical violation is somewhat unclear. Strictly speaking, virtually any time an attorney allows his client’s case to prescribe or to become abandoned, it could be said the attorney lacks competence in violation of Rule 1.1 and failed to act with diligence in violation of Rule 1.3. However, as a practical matter, disciplinary sanctions are not always appropriate in every instance in which an attorney commits minor violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct. In re: Hartley, 03-2828 (La.4/2/04), 869 So.2d 799 . When significant discipline has been imposed in this context, the cases typically involve situations in which the malpractice is combined with additional misconduct, such as where the attorney acts with |9deceit or misrepresents facts in an effort to conceal the malpractice from the client. See, e.g., In re: Blanson, 05-2561 (La.6/2/06), 930 So.2d 943 (attorney suspended for three years for allowing a suit to become abandoned and falsely assuring the client the suit was still pending when it had been dismissed).”
    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.