Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 4 Va. App. 500 - Shilling v. Commonwealth

4 Va. App. 500 - Shilling v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
November 2004
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently November 2004

17 state decisions

170198719902000decided

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 Ferguson v. Ferguson · Sigmon v. Commonwealth · McIntosh v. Commonwealth · Owens v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “[N]ew legislation will ordinarily not be construed to interfere with existing contracts, rights of action, suits, or vested property rights.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “There appears to be no good reason for excluding ... remedial statutes, from the general rule, that retroactive or retrospective legislation is not favored, in the absence of any words expressing a contrary intention. Undoubtedly, the legislature may declare a statute dealing with remedial legislation, or one not affecting vested rights, to have a retroactive operation. It is reasonable to conclude that the failure to express an intention to make a statute retroactive evidences a lack of such intention.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “would ... enervate [and] impede... the administration of the ... laws of the State.”
    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.