Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 213 CONN 637 - Singh v. Singh

Singh v. Singh’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
3
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Peerless Insurance v. Gonzalez (1997), State v. Ingram (1996)

50 state decisions

2801990200020102020decided

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. Bramblett · Roschen v. Ward · United States v. Raynor · Donnelley v. United States · Dart & Bogue Co. v. Slosberg

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

  1. “that every criminal CT Page 17012 statute must be given the narrowest possible meaning in complete disregard of the purpose of the legislature. . . . [n]o rule of construction . . . requires that a penal statute be strained and distorted in order to exclude conduct clearly intended to be within its scope — nor does any rule require that the act be given the `narrowest meaning.' It is sufficient if the words are given their fair meaning in accord with the evident intent of [the legislature]. . . . [s]trict construction does not mean that a statute must be read in isolation. In construing a statute, common sense must be used, and courts will assume that the legislature intended to accomplish a reasonable and rational result.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “`Law suits are not determined by a consideration of philosophy in the abstract, but by the application of legal principles to the facts of a particular case.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “disinclined to give any opinion, without any factual predicate . . . because to do so would amount to an advisory opinion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.