Whelchel v. McDonald’s Empirical Analysis
340 U.S. 122 · 1950
Citation profile
135 federal appellate · 19 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 231 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2016 · most notably Parker v. Levy (1974), Burns v. Wilson (1953)
135 federal appellate · 19 district · 5 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 Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Quirin Haupt Kerling Burger Heinck Thiel Neubauer United States Quirin v. Cox Usa 6 · Martin v. Mott · Kahn v. Anderson · Hiatt v. Brown
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 231 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We put to one side the due process issue which respondent presses, for we think it plain from the law governing court-martial procedure that there must be afforded a defendant at some point of time an opportunity to tender the issue of insanity. It is only a denial of that opportunity which goes to the question of jurisdiction. That opportunity was afforded here. Any error that may be committed in evaluating the evidence tendered is beyond the reach of review by the civil courts.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Any error by the military in evaluating the evidence on the question of insanity would not go to jurisdiction, the only issue before the court in habeas corpus proceedings.””
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.