135 Conn. App. 65 - State v. Reddy’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The next factor we consider in determining whether a statute is mandatory or directory is whether the pre-scribed mode of action is the essence of the thing to be accomplished, or in other words, whether it relates to a matter of substance [as opposed to] a matter of convenience.... If it is a matter of substance, the statutory provision is [generally held to be] mandatory. If, however, the legislative provision is designed to secure order, system and dispatch in the proceedings, it is generally held to be directory ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. Buchman

2. “'shall hold a hearing to determine whether the seized firearms should be returned to the person named in the warrant or should * continue to be held by the state,' " was mandatory because legislature used word "may”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. Buchman

3. “when the legislature opts to use the words shall and may in the same statute, they must then be assumed to have been used with discrimination and a full awareness of the difference in their ordinary meanings”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. Buchman