Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 345 U.S. 83 - Orloff v. Willoughby

Orloff v. Willoughby’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

2,508
cited by 2,508 later decisions
74
cited 74 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
June 2023
most recently cited

839 federal appellate · 360 district · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,508 later decisions (74 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2023 · most notably Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera (1966), Buckley v. Valeo (1976)

839 federal appellate · 360 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 11 states

716019531960197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedOrloff v. Willoughby (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Bridges v. United States · National Labor Relations Board v. Gamble Enterprises, Inc. · United States v. Mouat · Sherman

Cited together with Chappell v. Wallace · Gilligan v. Morgan · Parker v. Levy · Burns v. Wilson · Feres v. United States

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 2,508 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Orderly government requires that the judiciary be as scrupulous not to interfere with legitimate Army matters as the Army must be scrupulous not to intervene in judicial matters.”
    122 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he essence of military service 'is the subordination of the desires and interests of the individual to the needs of the service.'”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It is obvious that the commissioning of officers in the Army is a matter of discretion within the province of the President as Commander in Chief.... Petitioner, like every conscript, was inducted as a private. To obtain a change of that status requires appointment by or under authority of the President.”
    4 later decisions 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.