Cox v. Wedemeyer’s Empirical Analysis
192 F.2d 920 · 1951
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently May 1975 · most notably United States v. Abbott (1970), United States v. Owen (1969)
31 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Estep v. United States · Falbovs v. United States · Billings v. Truesdell · Gibson v. United States · Cramer v. France
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Section 1626.25(a) If an appeal involves the question whether or not a registrant is entitled to be sustained in his claim that he is a conscientious objector, the appeal board shall take the following action: “(1) * * * “(2) If the appeal board determines that such registrant is not eligible for classification in either a class lower than Class 1-A-O or in Class 1-A-O, the appeal board shall transmit the entire file to the United States Attorney for the judicial district in which the office of the appeal board is located for the purpose of securing an advisory recommendation from the Department of Justice. » * * “(4) If the appeal board determines that such registrant is not entitled to classification in either a class lower than Class 1-0 or in Class 1-0, it shall transmit the entire file to the United States Attorney for the judicial district in which the office of the appeal board is located for the purpose of securing an advisory recommendation from the Department of Justice. “(b) No registrant’s file shall be forwarded to the United States Attorney by an appeal board and any file so forwarded shall be returned, unless * * * the record shows and the letter of transmittal states that the appeal board reviewed the file and determined that the registrant should not be classified in either Class 1-A-O or Class 1-0 * * * ’’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“There is no evidence of such express or voluntary waiver as appeared in Mayborn v. Heflebower, 5 Cir. 1944, 145 F.2d 864, or Sanford v. Callan, 5 Cir. 1945, 148 F.2d 376.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Brown v. Resor
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.