Adams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “as a whole, avoiding excessive reliance on a strict, literal meaning or the selective reading of individual words.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bryan Alexander, Karl Cameron, William Love, Charlie Lovins, Kevin McMurray and Matt Oelker, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Linkmeyer Development II, LLC · A.J.R. v. State of Indiana

2. “Our primary goal in interpreting statutes is to determine and give effect to the Legislature’s intent. State v. Oddi-Smith, 878 N.E.2d 1245 (Ind.2008). The best evidence of that intent is a statute’s text. Id. The first step is therefore to decide whether the Legislature has spoken clearly and unambiguously on the point in question. Sloan [v. State ], 947 N.E.2d [917] at 922 [ (Ind.2011) ]. When a statute is clear and unambiguous, we must apply the plain and ordinary meaning of the language. Id. There is no need to resort to any other rules of statutory construction. Id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Brandan Jones v. State of Indiana

3. “Our primary goal in interpreting statutes is to determine and give effect to the Legislature's intent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. A.J.R. v. State of Indiana