Charisse v. Eldred’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is true that the question of intention is one of fact. Phillips v. Melton, supra. [[1]] Appellant places great reliance upon his own declarations of intention. The question of intention, however, is to be ascertained not only by statements of the person involved but by his conduct concerning his "voting" residence. Phillips v. Melton, supra. We have recognized that circumstances may belie protestations of purpose and that the fact finder is not bound to accept the claims of intent when the circumstances point to a contrary conclusion. Williams v. Dent, 207 Ark. 440 , 181 S.W.2d 29 . The declarations of the person whose domicile or residence is in dispute may be for a self-serving purpose and are sometimes called the lowest species or quality of evidence on the subject. * * * [Citing cases.] They cannot prevail unless borne out by acts. See Hogan v. Davis, 243 Ark. 763 , 422 S.W. 2d 412 ; Pike County School District No. 1 v. Pike County Board of Education, 247 Ark. 9 , 444 S.W.2d 72 ; 28 C.J.S. Domicile, § 18. When acts are inconsistent with a person's declarations, the acts will control, and declarations must yield to the conclusions to be drawn from the facts and circumstances proved. * * * [Citing cases.] The place of exercise of one's elective franchise is not necessarily conclusive as to one's intent on the question of domicile or residence for voting purposes, but it is certainly important, and may be the most important evidence on the subject. * * * [Citing cases.] I”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Holloway v. Farmers Insurance Exchange