Edwards v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““We have said more than once that the test of the constitutional validity of a law is not what has been done under it, but what may by its authority be done. Violett v. Alexandria, 92 Va. 561, 574 , 23 S. E. 909, 913 , 53 Am. St. Rep. 825 , 31 L. R. A. 382; Southern Ry. Co. v. Commonwealth, 107 Va. 771, 777 , 60 S. E. 70, 72 , 17 L. R. A. (N.S.) 364; Richmond v. Carneal, 129 Va. 388 , 106 S. E. 403 , 14 A. L. R. 1341.” Edwards v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 191 Va. 272 , 60 S. E. (2d) 916 . Accord: Demers v. Peterson, supra; Bowie v. Town of West Jefferson, 231 N. C. 408 , 57 S. E. (2d) 369 ; Herr v. Rudolf, 75 N. D. 91 , 25 N. W. (2d) 916 , 169 A. L. R. 1388; United Community Services v. Omaha Nat. Bank, 162 Neb. 786 , 77 N. W. (2d) 576 ; Appeal of Sleeper, 147 Me. 302 , 87 A. (2d) 115; Babb v. Bullitt, 310 Ky. 211 , 220 S. W. (2d) 394 ; Peter Kiewit Sons’ Co. v. County of Douglas, 161 Neb. 93 , 72 N. W. (2d) 415 ; Wilson v. Okla. Tire & Supply Co., 211 Ark. 77 , 199 S. W. (2d) 328 ; City of Los Angeles v. Lewis, 175 Cal. 777 , 167 Pac. 390 ; State v. Evans, 73 Idaho 50 , 245 P. (2d) 788 ; General Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Goodman, 128 Colo. 344 , 262 P. (2d) 261 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 56 Wash. 2d 48 - Peterson v. Hagan

2. ““§ 40-64. Preventing persons from pursuing lawful vocations, etc.; illegal picketing; injunction. — No person shall singly or in concert with others interfere or attempt to interfere with another in the exercise of his right to work or to enter upon the performance of any lawful vocation by the use of force, threats of violence or intimidation, or by the use of insulting or threatening language directed toward such person, to induce or attempt to induce him to quit his employment or refrain from seeking employment. “No person shall engage in picketing by force or violence, or picket alone or in concert with others in such manner as to obstruct or interfere with free ingress or egress to and from any premises, or obstruct or interfere with free use of public streets, sidewalks or other public ways. * # # # # “Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and punished accordingly.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hubbard v. Commonwealth

3. ““ ‘The pattern which emerges to shape the boundaries of State action seems to be that picketing is subject to regulation by the State, either by legislation or by court action. But such regulation must have a reasonable basis in prevention of disorder, restraint of coercion, protection of life or property, or promotion of the general welfare. The instrument of State action, whether judicial process or legislative enactment, must be specifically directed to acts or conduct which overstep legal limits, and not include those which keep within the protected area of free speech.’ ” Quoting Edwards, et al. v. Commonwealth, 191 Va. 227 , 60 S.E.2d 916 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 157 W. Va. 788 - United Maintenance & Manufacturing Co. v. United Steelworkers of America