State v. Klattenhoff

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• permitting concurrent representation of conflicting interests “when the AG can ensure independent representation for the competing parties” not resulting in prejudice to either (emphasis added)
• permitting concurrent representation of conflicting interests “when the AG can ensure independent representation for the competing parties” not resulting in prejudice to either (emphasis added)
• “[D]ue to the [attorney general]’s statutorily mandated role in our legal system, we cannot mechanically apply the Code of Professional Responsibility to the [attorney general]’s office.”
• “we adopt the rule set forth in United States v. Miller, and follow the majority of states in finding no reasonable expectation of privacy in personal bank records”
• “we adopt the rule set forth in United States v. Miller, [425 U.S. 435, 440-43, 96 S.Ct. 1619, 48 L.Ed.2d 71 (1976),] and follow the majority of states in finding no reasonable expectation of privacy in personal bank records”
• “we adopt the rule set forth in United States v. Miller, [425 U.S. 435, 440-43, 96 S.Ct. 1619, 48 L.Ed.2d 71 (1976),] and follow the majority of states in finding no reasonable expectation of privacy in personal bank records”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).