State v. Wang’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2017
7 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 Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond · Fertel-Rust v. Dane County Social Services · LOCKHEED CORP. Et Al. v. SPINK · Magill v. Evans
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““our foremost obligation is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature, which is to be obtained primarily from the language contained in the statute itself. And we must read statutory language in the context of the entire statute and construe it in a manner consistent with its purpose.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Putnam · State v. Sullivan“[T]he interpretation of a statute is a question of law reviewable de novo.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Savitz
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.