State v. EDWARD C.’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
2 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably COTE H. v. Dist. Ct. (2008), Cote v. Eighth Judicial District Court (2008)
2 district · 26 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 Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · State v. Vainio · Mundy Ex Rel. Pamela v. Simmons · Raymond v. State · State v. Hood
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he 'fundamental rule’ in statutory construction is that the legislative intent as divined from the statutory language controls the interpretation of the statute. Unless the statute reveals a contrary intent, the words ‘must be given their plain, common and ordinary meaning.’ We will not look beyond clear and unambiguous statutory language. To determine legislative intent when there is ambiguity in the statute, [however,] the court may look beyond the words themselves to the history of the statute, the policy behind it, and contemporary related legislation.”
3 later decisions 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.