Valdez v. Herrera’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
2 district · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Gunaji v. MacIas (2001), Valdez v. Gonzales (1946)
2 district · 32 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 Montoya v. Ortiz · Raymer v. Willis · Wright v. Closson · Carabajal v. Sandoval · State ex rel. Read v. Crist
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]here is . . . a constitutional mandate to which we must yield, that one which says that the person receiving the highest number of votes shall be elected to office; as well as the often announced principle that voters will not be denied their rightful voice in government absent a certain and controlling conflict with a more compelling consideration, that of the public interest to be served in the preservation of the validity of elections.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is a rule well grounded in justice and reason, and well established by authority and precedent, that the voter shall not be deprived of his rights as an elector either by fraud or the mistake of the election officers if it is possible to prevent it ... We said in State ex rel. Read v. Crist [Christ], 25 N.M. 175 , [199,] 179 P. 629 , 637 [1919], “the voter should not lightly be deprived of his right, nor should the successful candidate suffer, if by any reasonable interpretation of the laws governing elections it can be prevented.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gunaji v. MacIas“We must thus appraise mandate as against mandate, if there be a conflict. Certainly, the more controlling one is that the voter shall, ordinarily, have his vote recognized and the candidate be given the office to which he is elected if the votes are cast and returned under such circumstances that it can be said it represents the voice of the majority of the voters participating. And “the election will not be disturbed by reason of technical irregularities in the manner of conducting it or of making the returns thereof .. .”.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Carr v. Thomas
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.