Winkle v. Crabtree’s Empirical Analysis
1899
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 1935
8 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.
Relationships
Relies on Parvin v. Wimberg · People Ex Rel. Nichols v. Board of County Canvassers · Sego v. Stoddard · Bechtel v. Albin · Attorney General ex rel. Seavitt v. McQuade
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Every elector who performs the act of voting is presumed to know the law of his state, applicable to the exercise of the right of suffrage; and, if he fails to comply with its provisions, his mistake or ignorance deprives him of the benefit to be derived from the practice of such right. This being so, his right to have his choice declared as he intended must depend upon his compliance with the law applicable thereto in force on the day of the election. While the Australian ballot system is designed to purify elections by securing to the voter the prerogative of freely and privately selecting the candidates of his own choice, the law is also well calculated to promote the cause of general education, by compelling the masses to learn to read and write as a condition precedent to the exercise of the right of suffrage. . . . “To give effect to this latter purpose of the law, which is almost as important as its primary object, the statute should receive a reasonably strict construction.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hunt v. Campbell
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.