Commonwealth v. Kash’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently April 2019
18 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 Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · Kolender v. Lawson · Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent · United States v. Harriss
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The primary purpose of judicial construction is to carry out the intent of the legislature. In construing a statute, the courts must consider the intended purpose of the statute — the reason and spirit of the statute — and the mischief intended to be remedied. The courts should reject a construction that is unreasonable and absurd, in preference for one that is reasonable, rational, sensible and intelligent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“simply because a criminal statute could have been written more precisely does not mean the statute as written is unconstitutionally vague”). 47 . See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Foley, Ky., 798 S.W.2d 947, 951 (1990)(stating that analysis of constitutional vagueness includes inquiry as to”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Under the doctrine of in pari materia , statutes having a common purpose or subject matter must be construed together.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Commonwealth v. Reed
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.