Evans v. Kilroy’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
September 1992
most recently cited
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 866 · 10 U.S.C. § 912A · 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Relies on Will v. United States · Dettinger v. United States · Murray v. Haldeman · United States v. Labella · United States v. Longhofer
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.
“[Wjrits of mandamus are a drastic remedy that should be reserved for truly extraordinary cases requiring limitation of a lower court to the lawful exercise of prescribed jurisdiction. Harrison v. United States, 20 M.J. 55, 57 (C.M.A. 1985); Porter v. Eggers, 32 M.J. 583 (A.C.M.R.1990). This drastic remedy is not for cases where the error alleged is a mere abuse of discretion or even a gross error of the lower court. The petitioner must be seeking relief from a “judicial usurpation of power.” Will v. United States, 389 U.S. 90 , 88 S.Ct. 269 , 19 L.Ed.2d 305 (1967); Murray v. Haldeman, 16 M.J. 74 (C.M.A.1983).”
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.