Supreme Court· 11/13/1967

Will v. United States

Citations

389 U.S. 90
88 S. Ct. 269
19 L. Ed. 2d 305
1967 U.S. LEXIS 2931
20 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5743

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting that the writ of mandamus is one of “the most potent weapons in the judicial arsenal”
acknowledging that \only exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial `usurpation of power' will justify the invocation of\ the writ of mandamus, an \extraordinary remedy\
acknowledging that “only exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial ‘usurpation of power’ will justify the invocation of’ the writ of mandamus, an “extraordinary remedy”
acknowledging that \only exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial ‘usurpation of power’ will justify the invocation of\ the writ of mandamus, an \extraordinary remedy\
stating that \these aims lay at the core of this Court's decisions\ in La Buy v. Howes Leather Co., 352 U.S. 249, 77 S.Ct. 309, 1 L.Ed.2d 290 (1957), and Schlagenhauf
stating that “these aims lay at the core of this Court’s decisions” in La Buy v. Howes Leather Co., 352 U.S. 249, 77 S.Ct. 309, 1 L.Ed.2d 290 (1957), and Schlagenhauf

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Warren, Black, Marshall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

780 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Will v. United States

5 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.