Wickham v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
706 F.2d 713 · 1983
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2003
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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.
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 651 · 10 U.S.C. § 802 · 10 U.S.C. § 803 · 10 U.S.C. § 830 · 10 U.S.C. § 831 · 10 U.S.C. § 838 · 10 U.S.C. § 844 · 10 U.S.C. § 846
Relies on United States v. United Mine Workers of America · Burns v. Wilson · Reid v. Covert · Schlesinger v. Councilman · O'Callahan v. Parker
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Each person discharged from the armed forces who is later charged with having fraudulently obtained his discharge is, subject to section 843 of this title (article 43) [statute of limitations], subject to trial by court-martial on that charge and is after apprehension subject to this chapter while in the custody of the armed forces for that trial. Upon conviction of that charge he is subject to trial by court-martial for all offenses under this chapter committed before the fraudulent discharge.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Wickham, upon obtaining her discharge, was not totally released but instead was transferred from Active Duty to a Reserve component. She did not become a “full fledged” civilian. Wheeler v. Reynolds, 164 F.Supp. 951, 955 (N.D.Fla.1958). Since, even if her discharge from active duty was valid, Wickham remained in a Ready Reserve duty status for the remainder of her contract enlistment period, her status would not equate with that of a civilian. If it should be determined that the fraud-in-discharge issue is one that must constitutionally go to a civil court, we would nevertheless hold that Article 3(b) of the UCMJ is valid as applied to Wickham in this case since she remained a member of an armed forces reserve component.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is basic to military claims that the petitioner must exhaust her military remedies before seeking federal court intervention.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.