Blevins v. Orr’s Empirical Analysis
721 F.2d 1419 · 1983
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Drasek v. Lehman (1985), Randall v. United States (1996)
10 federal appellate · 10 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. § 1552 · 10 U.S.C. § 615 · 28 U.S.C. § 2401
Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Orloff v. Willoughby · In re Vendo Co. · Pauls v. Secretary of the Air Force
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is clear that military promotion decisions simpliciter are not susceptible to due process challenges, inasmuch as there exists no property or liberty interest in a military promotion per se.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We have found no authority, nor has appellant cited any, to support the argument that the determination to select officers for promotions through splitting the selection board — even if the number of promotions proves to be lower than in prior years — is violative of any constitutional, statutory or regulatory requirement, or is otherwise arbitrary or capricious.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The military constitutes a specialized community governed by a separate discipline from that of the civilian. Orderly government requires that the judiciary be as scrupulous not to interfere with legitimate [military] matters as the [military] must be scrupulous not to intervene in judicial matters.”
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.