Willis v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2019
10 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 35 Ill. 2d 33 - People Ex Rel. Meyer v. Kerner · 29 Wis. 2d 674 - Gradinjan v. Boho · 62 Wis. 2d 86 - Lanser v. Koconis · 82 Wis. 2d 585 - State Ex Rel. Ahlgrimm v. State Elections Board · Rich v. Walker
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) A person may not be considered to have gained a residence solely by reason of presence nor may a person lose it solely by reason of absence ... (2) The residence of a person is that place in which the person’s habitation is fixed, and to which, whenever absent, the person has the intention to return.... (3) A change of residence is made only by the act of removal joined with the intent to remain in another place. There can only be one residence. [[Image here]] (5) A person does not gain residence in any place to which the person comes without the present intention to establish a permanent dwelling at that place. [[Image here]] (8) The term of residence is computed by including the day on which the person’s residence begins and excluding the day of election. [[Image here]] (10) The address of a voter as it appears on an official voter registration card is presumptive evidence of the person’s voting residence. This presumption is negated only by the voter notifying the director in writing of a change of voting residence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cissna v. Stout“CASTING VOTE BY PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OR BY MAIL Upon receipt of an absentee ballot through a personal representative or by mail, the voter, whether in or outside the state, in the presence of an attesting witness who is at least 18 years of age, may proceed to mark the ballot in secret, to place the ballot in the small blank envelope, to place the small envelope in the larger envelope, and to sign the voter’s certifícate on the back of the larger envelope in the presence of the above-listed official or described persons who shall sign as attesting witnesses. The voter may then return the ballot properly enclosed in the envelopes, by personal representative to the election official who provided the ballot or by the most expeditious mail service, postmarked not later than the day of the election, to the election supervisor in his district.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Finkelstein v. Stout“All provisions of the election law are mandatory, if enforcement is sought before election in a direct proceeding for that purpose; but after election all should be held directory only, in support of the result, unless of a character to affect an obstruction to the free and intelligent casting of the vote or to the ascertainment of the result, or unless the provisions affect an essential element of the election, or unless it is expressly declared by the statute that the particular act is essential to the validity of an election, or-that its omission shall render it void.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Finkelstein v. Stout
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.