Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Mississippi opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2023 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ladner v. Necaisegreen2 sentences2022This Court has held that “[i]n a candidate qualification challenge, the standard of review for questions of law is de novo.” Young v. Stevens, 968 So. 2d 1260, 1262 (Miss. 2007) (citing Ladner v. Necaise, 771 So. 2d 353, 355 (Miss. 2000)). “[W]e review findings of fact by a trial judge sitting without a jury for manifest error, including whether the findings were the product of prejudice, bias, or fraud, or manifestly against the weight of the credible evidence.” Id. at 1263 (citations omitted). 2015We have held that “[i]n a candidate qualification challenge, the standard of review for questions of law is de novo.” Young v. Stevens, 968 So. 2d 1260, 1262 (Miss. 2007) (citing Ladner v. Necaise, 771 So. 2d 353, 355 (Miss. 2000)). “[W]e review findings of fact by a trial judge sitting without a jury for manifest error, including whether the findings were the product of prejudice, bias, or fraud, or manifestly against the weight of the credible evidence.” Id. at 1263 (citations omitted). | 5 | 5 |
Young v. Stevensgreen2 sentences2022This Court has held that “[i]n a candidate qualification challenge, the standard of review for questions of law is de novo.” Young v. Stevens, 968 So. 2d 1260, 1262 (Miss. 2007) (citing Ladner v. Necaise, 771 So. 2d 353, 355 (Miss. 2000)). “[W]e review findings of fact by a trial judge sitting without a jury for manifest error, including whether the findings were the product of prejudice, bias, or fraud, or manifestly against the weight of the credible evidence.” Id. at 1263 (citations omitted). 2015We have held that “[i]n a candidate qualification challenge, the standard of review for questions of law is de novo.” Young v. Stevens, 968 So.2d 1260, 1262 (Miss.2007) (citing Ladner v. Necaise, 771 So.2d 853, 355 (Miss.2000)). “[W]e review findings of fact by a trial judge sitting without a jury for manifest error, including whether the findings were the product of prejudice, bias, or fraud, or manifestly against the weight of the credible evidence.” Id. at 1263 (citations omitted). | 4 | 4 |
Bryant v. Westbrooksgreen2 sentences2022We have held that “whether a candidate meets [the] residency requirement [to run for office] clearly involves questions of fact.” Bryant v. Westbrooks, 99 So. 3d 128, 134 (Miss. 2012). 2015We have held that “whether a candidate meets [the] residency requirement [to run for office] clearly involves questions of fact.” Bryant v. Westbrooks, 99 So.3d 128, 134 (Miss.2012). ¶ 16. | 3 | 3 |
Steve Hale v. Mississippi Democratic Executive Committeegreen2 sentences2023Comm., 168 So. 3d 946, 951 (Miss. 2015)). 2023Comm., 168 So. 3d 946, 951 (Miss. 2015)). | 2 | 2 |
McIntosh v. Sandersgreen1 sentence2021If a candidate- qualification challenge could be brought after the general election, as the Andreacchios attempted to do, then why would the Legislature expressly except this type of challenge from 9 McIntosh, 831 So. 2d at 1113-14 (emphasis added) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Grist v. Faresegreen1 sentence2012Comm., 956 So.2d 906, 909 (Miss.2007); Grist v. Farese, 860 So.2d 1182, 1185 (Miss.2003); see also Cameron v. Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Garner v. DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEEgreen1 sentence2012Comm., 956 So.2d 906, 909 (Miss.2007); Grist v. Farese, 860 So.2d 1182, 1185 (Miss.2003); see also Cameron v. Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Saliba v. Salibagreen1 sentence2007Ladner v. Necaise, 771 So.2d 353, 355 (Miss.2000) (citing Saliba v. Saliba, 753 So.2d 1095, 1098 (Miss.2000)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.