153 Ohio St. 372 - Pierce v. Brushart’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga County Board (1995), 133 N.J. Super. 403 - Egner v. Egner (1975)
38 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.
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Protests against the candidacy of any person filing a declaration of candidacy for party nomination or for election to an office or position, as provided in this section, may be filed by any qualified elector who is a member of the same political party as the candidate, or by the controlling committee of such party. Such protest must be in writing, and must be filed not later than four p. m. of the eightieth day before the day of the primary election. Such protest shall be filed with the election officials with whom the declaration of candidacy and petition was filed. Upon the filing of such protest the election officials with whom it is filed shall promptly fix the time for hearing it, and shall forthwith mail notice of the filing of such protest and the time fixed for hearing it to the person whose candidacy is so protested. They shall also forthwith mail notice of the time fixed for such hearing to the person who filed the protest. At the time fixed such election officials shall hear the protest and determine the validity or invalidity of the declaration of candidacy and petition. If they find that such candidate is not an elector of the state, district, county, or political subdivision in which he seeks a party nomination or election to an office or position, or has not fully complied with §§3513.01 to 3513.32, inclusive, R. C., his declaration of candidacy and petition shall be determined to be invalid and shall be rejected, otherwise it shall be determined to be valid.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is universally recognized that a person may adopt any name he may choose so long as such change is not made for fraudulent purposes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re H.C.W.
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.