Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 374 F.2d 1 - Davis v. United States

Davis v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

374 F.2d 1 · 1967

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
September 2007
most recently cited

45 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2007 · most notably Ehlert v. United States (1971), Scott v. Commanding Officer (1970)

45 federal appellate · 6 district ·

30019671970198019902000decided

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. § 456

Relies on Swain v. State of Alabama · Witmer v. United States · Foti v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Keene v. United States · United States v. Schoebel

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

  1. “§ 1625.2. When registrant’s classification may be reopened and considered anew. The local board may reopen and consider anew the classification of a registrant (a) upon the written request of the registrant, * * * if such request is accompanied by written information presenting facts not considered when the registrant was classified which, if true, would justify a change in the registrant’s classification ; * * * provided, * * * the classification of a registrant shall not be reopened after the local board has mailed to such registrant an Order to Report for Induction (SSS Form, No. 252 * * * unless the local board first specifically finds there has been a change in the registrant’s status resulting from circumstances over which the registrant had no control. (Emphasis added)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The reopening of the classification of a registrant by the local board shall cancel any Order To Report for Induction (SSS Form No. 252) or Order To Report for Civilian Work and Statement of Employer (SSS No. 153) which may have been issued to the registrant, except that if the registrant has failed to comply with either of those orders, the reopening of his classification thereafter by the local board for the purpose of placing him in Class IV-C or Class V-A shall not cancel the order with which he failed to comply.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The local board may reopen and consider anew the classification of a registrant (a) upon the written request of the registrant . . . provided, . . . the classification of a registrant shall not be reopened after the local board has mailed to such registrant an Order to Report for Induction unless the local board first specifically finds there lias been a change in the registrant’s status resulting from circumstances over which the registrant had no control.””
    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.