Maguire v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
4 district · 95 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 99 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably State v. Fabritz (1975), Price v. State (2003)
4 district · 95 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Chase · Ward v. Maryland · Reiche v. Smythe · Pittman v. Housing Authority · State Tax Commission v. Potomac Electric Power Co.
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 99 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘It is an old and familiar rule that “where there is, in the same statute, a particular enactment, and also a general one, which, in its most comprehensive sense, would include what is embraced in the former, the particular enactment must be operative, and the general enactment must be taken to affect only such cases -within its general language as are not within the provisions of the particular enactment.” ’ ” (Citations omitted).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Adherence to the meaning of words does not require or permit isolation of words from their context. * * the meaning of the plainest words in a statute may be controlled by the context. A statute should be so construed that.all its parts harmonize with each other and render them consistent with its general object and scope.’ Pittman v. Housing Authority, 180 Md. 457, 463-464 , 25 A. 2d 466, 469 . * * it is the most natural and general exposition of a statute to construe one part of the statute by another part of the same statute, for that best expresseth the meaning of the makers.’ Coke upon Littleton, p. 381a. ‘If it be true that it is the duty of the court to ascertain the meaning of the legislature from the words used in the statute and the subject-matter to which it relates, there is an equal duty to restrict the meaning of general words, whenever it is found necessary to do so, in order to carry out the legislative intention.’ Reiche v. Smythe, 13 Wall. 162, 164 , 20 L. Ed. 566 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““This rule applies wherever an act contains general provisions and also special ones upon a subject which, standing alone, the general provisions would include.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.