State v. Hensley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 14 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “When interpreting a statute, the foremost objective is to determine and effect legislative intent. Statutes must be construed to give effect to legislative intent, and courts must give deference to such intent whenever possible. Thus, courts must consider the goals of the statute and the reasons and policy underlying the statute’s enactment. Courts are to examine and interpret a statute as a whole, giving words their common and ordinary meaning, and not overemphasize a strict, literal, or selective reading of individual words. Words and phrases are taken in their plain, ordinary, and usual meaning unless a different purpose is manifested by the statute. Where possible, every word must, be given effect and meaning, and no part is to be held meaningless if it can be reconciled with the rest of the statute. The meaning and intention of the legislature are to be ascertained not only from the phraseology of the statute but also by considering its nature, design, and the consequences which flow from the reasonable alternative interpretations of the statute. Statutes relating to the same general subject matter are in pari mate-ria and should be construed together so as to produce a harmonious statutory scheme.”

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

2. “During the 1990 legislative session, our General Assembly passed P.L. 180-1990, an Act concerning the compensation of Indiana State Law Enforcement Officers, which read, in pertinent part, as follows: (e) The personnel department shall establish the same position classification plans and salary wage schedules (including overtime policies) for law enforcement officers of the law enforcement division of the department of natural resources that are established for law enforcement officers of the state police department.”

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

3. “[t]he statute of limitation in effect at the time a lawsuit is commenced governs the action regardless of whether it lengthens or shortens the time allowed for bringing suit.” State v. Hensley, 661 N.E.2d 1246, 1249 (Ind. Ct.App.1996). 4 . This is the view apparently advanced by Amicus Indiana State Medical Association:”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Indiana Spine Group v. Pilot Travel