Driver v. Van Cott’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 6 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The holdings under review declaring the entire statute unconstitutional are inappropriate where the objectionable part of the statute can properly be eliminated without rendering the remainder of the statute incomplete or without causing results not contemplated by the Legislature. This is consistent with the policy of preserving the constitutionality of a statute if it is possible to do so by elimination of invalid clauses without destroying the legislative objectives. The constant standard of our authorities through the years has been that statutory enactments are to be interpreted so as to accomplish rather than defeat their purpose. Id. (footnotes omitted)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Crossley v. State

2. “The . . . clause . . . exempting those whose civil rights have been restored is, of course, clear and unambiguous and is constitutional. At 543.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Crossley v. State