Young v. Stevens’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 753 So. 2d 1095 - Saliba v. Saliba · Smith v. Deere · 873 So. 2d 108 - Mississippi Dept. of Transp. v. Johnson · 912 So. 2d 124 - Boyd v. TISHOMINGO CTY. DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE · 771 So. 2d 353 - Ladner v. Necaise
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Mississippi, residence and domicile are synonymous for election purposes. Hinds County Election Comm’n v. Brinston, 671 So.2d 667, 668 (Miss.1996). A person’s domicile in election matters is the place: where he has his true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, and to which whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning.... A domicile continues until another is acquired; before a domicile can be considered lost or changed, a new domicile must be acquired by removal to a new locality with intent to remain there, and the old domicile must be abandoned without intent to return thereto. Smith v. Deere, 195 Miss. 502, 505-06 , 16 So.2d 33, 34 (1943) (internal citations omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bryant v. Westbrooks“The determination of a person’s “permanent home and principal establishment” turns on actual proof of a person’s living arrangements. It is not satisfied with a simple declaration that one intends to be a resident of a particular county when the overwhelming proof shows that he actually resides elsewhere. It is not enough that [the candidate] considers himself an official resident of [the district]. He must actually reside there permanently.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bryant v. Westbrooks“If the proper executive committee finds that a candidate either (a) is not a qualified elector, (b) does not meet all qualifications to hold the office he seeks and fails to provide absolute proof, subject to no contingencies, that he will meet the qualifications on or before the date of the general or special election at which he could be elected ... then the name of such candidate shall not be placed upon the ballot.”
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.