Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 899 SW2D 346 - Bejarano v. Hunter

Bejarano v. Hunter’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2012

12 state decisions

60199520002010decided

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 Roe v. Wade · GENERAL LAND OFFICE OF THE STATE OF TEX. v. Oxy USA, Inc. · Wallace v. Howell · Pilcher v. Rains · Gray v. Vance

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

  1. “(a) On the filing of an application for a place on the ballot, the authority with whom the application is filed shall review the application to determine whether it complies with the requirements as to form, content, and procedure that it must satisfy for the candidate’s name to be placed on the ballot. (b) Except as provided by Subsection (c), the review shall be completed not later than the fifth day after the date the application is received by the authority. (c) If an application is accompanied by a petition, the petition is considered part of the application, and the review shall be completed as soon as practicable after the date the application is received by the authority..... (d) A determination under this section that an application complies with the applicable requirements does not preclude a subsequent determination that the application does not comply, subject to Section 141.034. (e) If an application does not comply with the applicable requirements, the authority shall reject the application and immediately deliver to the candidate written notice of the reason for the rejection. (f) This section does not apply to a determination of a candidate’s eligibility.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The supreme court or a court of appeals may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of any duty imposed by law in connection with the holding of an election or a political party convention, regardless of whether the person responsible for performing the duty is a public officer.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “be timely filed with the appropriate authority.”
    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.