Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 152 Neb. 746 - Miller v. Mersch

Miller v. Mersch’s Empirical Analysis

1950

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
3
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 2013

14 state decisions

601950196019701980199020002010decided

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 McMaster v. Wilkinson · Griffith v. Bonawitz · State ex rel. Short v. Clausen · Wightman v. Village of Tecumseh · State ex rel. Hocknell v. Roper

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

  1. ““It is the policy of the law to prevent the disfranchisement of qualified electors who have cast their ballots in good faith by requiring only a substantial compliance with the election laws of the state. The privilege of voting, though the voter is absent from the voting precinct at the time of the election, requires a departure from the general rule governing the method of exercising- the right to vote. Voting by mail constitutes a special privilege' and requires a stricter adherence to the legislative conditions imposed upon its exercise. “Compliance with the conditions imposed by the statutory grant is essential to the exercise of the right. The act itself prescribes the manner of its exercise when it states that an absentee elector may vote- at such election only in a manner prescribed in the act.” (Citing authorities).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “While the cases are not in accord as to whether illegal, rejected, and blank ballots shall be counted in determining the total vote cast, we think the correct rule is, in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary, that ballots which have been cast which are entitled by law to be counted in declaring the result of the election shall alone be counted in determining the vote cast. This simply means that ballots improperly cast, or rejected for illegality, or left wholly blank, are no part of the `ballots cast at such election' within the meaning of section 79-616, R.S. 1943.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.