Regarding blade vs. cutting edge length, Judge Lowell Bray touched on this subject once in his column in blade. In the case he wrote about, they went by the length of the cutting edge. I have not looked in a dictionary lately, but according to the article, Webster defined the blade as the sharpened cutting portion of the knife. So they did not count the unsharpened choil. This arguement also makes sense to me, because otherwise what would they do with a knife just made from one flat piece of steel with no distinct demarkation between handle and blade? Also, the purpose of the choil on that knife is specifically so you can put a finger there for more control. If it's designed to put part of your hand there, then it sure sounds like part of the handle to me.
Regarding the court case in the article, as far as I know one state will not look to other states for a precedence. An Illinois judge will not look for the opinions reached by a California judge. (do I have this correct, TLC?) However, it seems someone interested to the case could file an amicus curiae report pointing out the logic used by other courts, which might still help.
Good to hear that case in Carbondale was thrown out! I've long maintained that the courts in rural areas aren't near as bad as lots of the big city horror stories we hear. If that same incident happened in Chicago or even Los Angeles, I'm sure the outcome would have been different- at the very least an expensive trial.
