State v. Denhardt’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[n]o adult shall transport, or have in his possession or control, any alcoholic liquor or malt beverage, with the intent of furnishing the same to any minor, while operating or occupying a motor vehicle,” the legislature intended the phrase “while operating or occupying a motor vehicle” to modify the word “adult.” Since the phrase is set off by a comma, it is a dangling elliptical clause unless it is assumed to refer to “adult,” which is the subject of the main clause. J. Hodges & M. Whitten, Hodge’s College Handbook (7th ed.1972). In contrast, if the comma were not there, the phrase would modify the word “minor.” While it is true that a court does not sit as a “panel of grammarians” to review statutes, neither is the judiciary permitted to regard ordinary principles of English prose as irrelevant when construing a statute. Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 150 , 80 S.Ct. 630, 633 , 4 L.Ed.2d 623 , reh. denied 362 U.S. 972 , 80 S.Ct. 953 , 4 L.Ed.2d 901 [902] (1960). Individual members of this court have previously noted this concept. Battlefield, Inc. v. Neely, 656 P.2d 1154 (Wyo.1983) (Thomas, J., dissenting); Matter of Voss’ Adoption, 550 P.2d 481 (Wyo.1976) (Guthrie, C.J., dissenting, with whom MeClintock, J., joined). See also Kindler v. Anderson, 433 P.2d 268 (Wyo.1967).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Waid v. State Ex Rel. Department of Transportation