Denby v. Berry’s Empirical Analysis
263 U.S. 29 · 1923
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 13 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2005 · most notably Cafeteria & Restaurant Workers Union, Local 473 v. McElroy (1961), Fisher v. United States (2005)
20 federal appellate · 13 district · 4 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Brown v. United States · United States v. Burns · The United States v. Catesby Ap Roger Jones · Denby v. Berry
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[1] t is quite evident . . . that members of this force occupied two statuses, one that of inactive duty, and the other of active service. It is further clear that it was within the power of the President, and of the Secretary of the Navy acting for him, to change the members of the Reserve Force from one status to the other. . . . Orders releasing individuals from active service and putting them on inactive duty were clearly within the power of the President and of the Secretary of the Navy acting for him in the administration of the act.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Nowhere is there found any limitation upon the discretion of the Executive in this regard. The orders in such cases were in the nature of military orders by the Commander-in-Chief in the assignment or withdrawal of available forces to or from duty for the good of the service. Such orders of withdrawal could not and did not make members of the Naval Reserve Force civilians. They did not release them from obligation under their enrollment to render active service again when ordered to do so by the proper authority.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““It would be a curious inconsistency in the procedure if the Secretary were compelled by law to order a retiring board to consider an officer’s case which the President is given discretion to grant or withhold.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.