In re Miller’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““His enlistment having made the prisoner a soldier notwithstanding his minority, he is amenable to the military law, just as the citizen who is a minor is amenable to the civil law. The parents cannot prevent the law’s enforcement in either cáse. It is not reasonable that a minor, of age to enlist, who secures the honorable and responsible position of a soldier in the United States army, could abandon his colors in the face of the enemy and on the eve of battle, and avoid trial and punishment for desertion by the intervention of his parents, who had not consented to his enlistment, but who had taken no step to avoid it before the soldier’s arrest for desertion, or that he could endanger the army by betraying its secrets to the enemy, and not be amenable to military jurisdiction, his parents objecting. We cannot approve a view that leads to such results.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Reaves · Dillingham v. Booker

2. ““But this provision is for the benefit of the parent or guardian. It means simply that the government will not disturb the control of parent or guardian over his or her child without consent. It gives the right to such parent or guardian to invoke the aid of the court and secure the restoration of the minor to his or her control; but it gives no privilege to the minor. The age at which an infant shall be competent to do any acts or perform any duties, military or civil, depends upon the Legislature. * * * Congress has declared that minors over the age of 16 (14 in the navy) are capable of entering upon the military service and undertaking and performing its duties. “An enlistment is not a contract only, but effects a change of status. * * * It is not, therefore, like an ordinary contract, voidable by an infant. At common law an enlistment was not voidable, either by the infant or his parents or guardians [citing eases]. In this case the parent never insisted upon her right of custody and control, and the fact that he had a mother living at the time is therefore immaterial. The contract of enlistment was good so far as the petitioner is concerned. He was not only de facto, but de jure, a soldier — amenable to military jurisdiction.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States ex rel. Hendricks v. Pendleton

3. ““That the said Auburn Moore was duly enlisted as a soldier in the service of the United States at Columbus, Ohio, on February 6, 1907, for a term of three years. That the said Auburn Moore deserted said service at Ft. William Henry Harrison, Mont., on December 19, 1907, and remained absent in desertion until he surrendered himself at Jackson Barracks, New Orleans. Da., January 3, 1008, and was thereupon committed to the custody of the respondent as the commanding officer of the post of Jackson Barracks. That the said Auburn Moore has been placed in confinement charged with said offense, and formal charges against him therefor are being prepared, and that he will be brought to trial thereon as soon as practicable before a court-martial to be convened by the commanding general of the Department of the Gulf.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Moore v. United States