Middleton v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We must presume that the results of an election contest are valid. Streeter v. Paschal, 267 Ga. 207, 208 , 476 S.E.2d 759 (1996). Thus, an election will not be invalidated unless the party contesting the election demonstrates an irregularity or illegality sufficient to change or place in doubt the result. Id.; Bailey v. Colwell, 263 Ga. 111 , 428 S.E.2d 570 (1993). To carry that burden, the challenger must show a specific number of illegal or irregular ballots — and that number must be sufficient to cast doubt on the result of the election. McCranie v. Mullis, 267 Ga. 416 , 478 S.E.2d 377 (1996). Accord Hunt v. Crawford, 270 Ga. 7 , 507 S.E.2d 723 (1998). Accord Taggart v. Phillips, 242 Ga. 454 , 249 S.E.2d 245 (1978). It is not sufficient to show irregularities which simply erode confidence in the outcome of the election. Elections cannot be overturned on the basis of mere speculation, Hunt, supra at 9 , 507 S.E.2d 723 , or an appearance of impropriety in the election procedures. Compare Stiles v. Earnest, 252 Ga. 260, 263 , 312 S.E.2d 337 (1984).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mead v. Sheffield

2. “irregularity by any primary or election official or officials sufficient to change or place in doubt the result”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mead v. Sheffield