considers the following factors (Nebraska) · Go Syfert
← Nebraska issues

considers the following factors in Nebraska

10 Nebraska opinions name it 1 courts 1999–2018 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Nebraska courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nebraska.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nebraska. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
State ex rel. Counsel for Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court v. Dortch green
neb · 2007
2 sentences

2009Counsel for Dis. v. Dortch, 273 Neb. 667 , 731 N.W.2d 594 (2007). [8, 9] To determine whether and to what extent discipline should be imposed in a lawyer discipline proceeding, this court considers the following factors: (1) the nature of the offense, (2) the need for deterring others, (3) the maintenance of the reputation of the bar as a whole, (4) the protection of the public, (5) the attitude of the offender generally, and (6) the offender's present or future fitness to continue in the practice of law.

2009Counsel for Dis. v. Dortch, 273 Neb. 667 , 731 N.W.2d 594 (2007). [8, 9] To determine whether and to what extent discipline should be imposed in a lawyer discipline proceeding, this court considers the following factors: (1) the nature of the offense, (2) the need for deterring others, (3) the maintenance of the reputation of the bar as a whole, (4) the protection of the public, (5) the attitude of the offender generally, and (6) the offender's present or future fitness to continue in the practice of law.

32008–2009
State Ex Rel. Counsel for Discipline v. Rokahr green
neb · 2004
2 sentences

2005Counsel for Dis. v. Rokahr, 267 Neb. 436 , 675 N.W.2d 117 (2004). *436 To determine whether and to what extent discipline should be imposed in a lawyer discipline proceeding, this court considers the following factors: (1) the nature of the offense, (2) the need for deterring others, (3) the maintenance of the reputation of the bar as a whole, (4) the protection of the public, (5) the attitude of the offender generally, and (6) the offender’s present or future fitness to continue in the practice of law.

2005Counsel for Dis. v. Rokahr, 267 Neb. 436 , 675 N.W.2d 117 (2004). *436 To determine whether and to what extent discipline should be imposed in a lawyer discipline proceeding, this court considers the following factors: (1) the nature of the offense, (2) the need for deterring others, (3) the maintenance of the reputation of the bar as a whole, (4) the protection of the public, (5) the attitude of the offender generally, and (6) the offender’s present or future fitness to continue in the practice of law.

32004–2005
State Ex Rel. Counsel for Discipline of the Neb. Supreme Court v. Wolfe green
neb · 2018
1 sentence

2018Id.

12018–2018
State ex rel. Counsel for Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court v. Hart neutral
neb · 2003
2 sentences

2016Counsel for Dis. v. Hart, 265 Neb. 649 , 658 N.W.2d 632 (2003). 2 State ex rel.

2016Counsel for Dis. v. Hart, 265 Neb. 649 , 658 N.W.2d 632 (2003). 2 State ex rel.

12016–2016
STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. OF NEB. SUPREME COURT v. Wintroub green
neb · 2009
1 sentence

2010Id.

12010–2010
In Re Interest of Floyd B. green
neb · 1998
2 sentences

1999In re Interest of Floyd B., 254 Neb. 443 , 577 N.W.2d 535 (1998); § 43-1207(3).

1999In re Interest of Floyd B., 254 Neb. 443 , 577 N.W.2d 535 (1998); § 43-1207(3).

11999–1999

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 7-114 (9) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 7-104 (8) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-310 (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TN 211 (2000–2025) IL 31 (1990–2026) MS 20 (1995–2024) MI 16 (2014–2026) WA 16 (1997–2024) NC 15 (1980–2026) PA 12 (1998–2024) NE 10 (1999–2018) NJ 9 (2013–2025) AR 8 (1993–2020) IA 8 (2010–2024) CA 8 (2020–2026) DE 7 (2009–2023) TX 7 (2005–2018) AL 7 (1997–2017) OH 7 (2007–2025) MO 5 (1994–2018) WI 5 (1999–2025) SC 5 (2004–2023) RI 4 (2009–2011) NV 4 (2016–2018) SD 4 (1991–2025) VT 3 (2006–2025) DC 3 (1994–2002) OK 3 (1993–2004) MD 2 (2019–2019) ID 2 (1993–2003) IN 2 (1999–2003) OR 2 (2002–2018) LA 2 (2011–2016) KS 2 (2015–2020) KY 2 (2025–2026) AK 2 (1993–1993) MN 2 (1993–1999) WY 2 (2013–2013)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check