Supreme Court· 6/17/1957
Theard v. United States
Citations
- 354 U.S. 278
- 77 S. Ct. 1274
- 1 L. Ed. 2d 1342
- 1957 U.S. LEXIS 656
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- recognizing inherent power of district courts to promulgate and enforce rules concerning disbarment of attorneys
- describing lawyer as “an officer of the court, and, like the court itself, an instrument or agency to advance the ends of justice”
- stating that disbarment is a necessary power to protect the public
- suspending an attorney although no action had taken by the state court
- finding state court disbarment decision “brings title deeds of high respect ... [b]ut it is not conclusively binding on the federal courts,” and concluding that federal court disbarment in that case was foreclosed by the “grave reason” prong of Selling
- \The court's control over a lawyer's professional life derives from his relation to the responsibilities of a court.\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Frankfurter, Black, Whittaker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
256 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re RuffaloSupreme Court· 1968-05-27· cited 994×
- Gentile v. State Bar of Nev.Supreme Court· 1991-06-27· cited 552×
- In Re SnyderSupreme Court· 1985-06-24· cited 385×
- State Bar of Nevada v. ClaiborneNevada Supreme Court· 1988-05-18· cited 273×
- Neal Clark v. State of Washington, and Washington State Bar Association, an Agency of State Government, the State Bar of California, Amicus CuriaeNinth Circuit· 1966-10-31· cited 215×
- Frazier v. HeebeSupreme Court· 1987-06-19· cited 196×
- In Re: Robert B. SurrickThird Circuit· 2003-08-01· cited 158×
- United States v. Barbara Mouzin, United States of America v. Alfonso CarvajalNinth Circuit· 1986-03-18· cited 143×
- Landon Zuckerman and Sam Haber v. Appellate Division, Second Department, Supreme Court of the State of New YorkSecond Circuit· 1970-01-29· cited 141×
- United States v. McKinneyFifth Circuit· 1995-05-18· cited 130×
- United States v. Nathan George DinitzFifth Circuit· 1976-09-20· cited 125×
- In Re CookSixth Circuit· 2009-01-06· cited 123×
- Martin Erdmann v. Harold A. StevensSecond Circuit· 1972-04-12· cited 115×
- Martori Bros. Distributors v. James-MassengaleNinth Circuit· 1986-01-30· cited 114×
- Nick C. Spanos v. Skouras Theatres Corporation, Theatre & Cinema, Inc., Philhamboro, Inc., Youngstown Theatre Corporation and Modern Playhouses, Inc.Second Circuit· 1966-08-02· cited 109×
- Crowe v. SmithFifth Circuit· 1998-08-12· cited 108×
- United States v. John NovakSecond Circuit· 1990-05-14· cited 105×
- John Doe v. E. E. PringleTenth Circuit· 1976-12-27· cited 102×
- Neil S. MacKay v. The Honorable Buell A. Nesbett and the Honorable John H. DimondNinth Circuit· 1969-08-07· cited 93×
- Dailey v. Vought Aircraft Co.Fifth Circuit· 1998-05-12· cited 90×
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners of NMSupreme Court· 1957-05-06· cited 1,276×
- Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court· 1912-06-07· cited 891×
- Konigsberg v. State Bar of Cal.Supreme Court· 1957-06-17· cited 333×
- Selling v. RadfordSupreme Court· 1917-03-06· cited 254×
- Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. TheardSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1954-03-22· cited 12×
- Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. TheardSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1952-12-15· cited 8×
- Delvaille H. Theard v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1956-01-31· cited 3×
Other cases named Theard v. United States
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.