Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 853 SO2D 1226 - Rush v. Ivy

Rush v. Ivy’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 558 So. 2d 869 - Tucker v. Hinds County · 481 So. 2d 247 - Shaw v. Burchfield · 584 So. 2d 397 - Lyle v. Mladinich · 700 So. 2d 619 - Russell v. Orr · Richmond v. Benchmark Const. Corp.

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

  1. “the clear requirements of Section 23-15-13 of the Mississippi Election Code that an elector who moves from one ward or voting precinct to another ward within the same municipality or voting precinct within the same county must make a written request to the appropriate registrar to transfer his or her registration to their new ward or voting precinct”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “This Court applies a de novo standard of review on appeal from a grant of summary judgment by the trial court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Summary judgment is an appropriate procedural device capable of being utilized in election disputes.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.