Chernekoff v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
219 F.2d 721 · 1955
Citation profile
97
cited by 97 later decisions
April 1984
most recently cited
81 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently April 1984 · most notably Parrott v. United States (1966), Oshatz v. United States (1968)
81 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
Applies 50 U.S.C. § 3811
Relies on Palko v. State of Connecticut · United States v. Nugent · Billings v. Truesdell · Williams v. United States
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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““37. Induction, a. The following procedure will be followed in the induction of all registrants into the Armed Forces: * * * * * “(2) Any registrant who fails or refuses to step forward when his name is called will be removed quietly and courteously from the presence of the group about to be inducted and processed as prescribed in paragraph 40c. * # * * * “40c. Registrants who refuse to submit to induction. Any registrant who has been removed from the group as prescribed in paragraph 37a(2) and who persists in his refusal to submit to induction will be informed that such refusal constitutes a felony under the provisions of the Universal Military Training and Service Act, as amended. He will be informed further that conviction of such an offense under civil proceedings will subject him to be punished by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. He will then be informed again of the imminence of induction using the language specified in paragraph 37a (1) and his name and service number again will be called. If he steps forward at this time, he will be informed that he is a member of the Armed Forces concerned, using the language specified in paragraph 37a(3). If, however, he persists in refusing to be inducted, the following action will be taken * *”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““23. Induction. — The following procedure will be followed in the induction of all registrants into the Armed Forces: “a. Registrants who have been determined to be fully qualified for induction in all respects will be assembled. The inducting officer will inform them of the imminence of induction, quoting the following: “You are about to be inducted into the Armed Services of the United States, in the Army, the Navy, or the Air Force, as indicated by the service announced following your name when called. You will take one step forward as your name and service are called and such step will constitute your induction into the Armed Service indicated. “b. A commissioned officer or warrant officer then will call the roll and the foregoing procedure will be carried out. * * * ” * !}s * * “27. Processing registrants in special categories. * # sfc sfc “b. Registrants who refuse to submit to induction. — Any registrant removed from the group as prescribed in paragraph 23, and who persists in his refusal to submit to induction, will be informed that such refusal constitutes a felony under the provision of the Selective Service Regulations. He will be informed further that conviction of such an offense under civil proceedings will subject him to be punished by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. He will then be informed again of the imminence of induction using the language specified in paragraph 23a, and his name and service again will ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““All registrants who have been determined to be fully qualified for induction in all respects were assembled. The Induction Officer informed them of the imminence of induction, quoting the following: ‘You are about to be inducted into the Armed Services of the United States, in the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, or the Marine Corps, as indicated by the service announced following your name when called. You will take one step forward as your name and service are called and such step will constitute your induction into the Armed Service indicated’. “When Mr. James Donald EDWARDS name and service were called, lie refused to step forward. He was removed quietly and courteously from the presence oí the group about to be inducted and processed as prescribed in paragraphs 36b and 40c, AR 601-270, dated 11 March 1960, as amended. “Mr. James Donald EDWARDS persisted in his refusal to submit to induction. He was informed that such refusal constitutes a felony under the provisions of the Universal Military-Training and Service Act, as amended. He was informed further that conviction of such an offense under civil proceedings will subject him to be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years, or a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. He was then informed again of the imminence of induction by the Induction Officer, who quoted the following: ‘You are about to be inducted into the Armed Services of the United States, in the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, or the Marine Corps, a”
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.