Palmer v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
401 F.2d 226 · 1968
Citation profile
84
cited by 84 later decisions
April 1974
most recently cited
68 federal appellate · 6 district ·
Relationships
Applies 50 U.S.C. § 3811
Relies on Boyd v. United States · United States v. Underwood · United States v. Monroe · United States v. Bonga
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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question for the Court is simply whether at the time of refusal to submit to induction the registrant was under a duty to submit. If he was, a crime was then committed. In dealing with this question the courts do examine into the validity of the order to report and this in turn involves a limited review of past board action in classifying the registrant. These matters bear directly upon the issue of guilt. What occurs after refusal, however, is not relevant to that issue.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * Classification functions of the local board cease with induction, and a registrant cannot, by refusing to submit to induction, impose upon the board any new duties respecting reclassification or reopening.” 401 F.2d at 227-228 . A separate order has been entered.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The board may (as 32 C.F.R. sec. 1625.14 seems to recognize) have power to reopen classification even after the registrant has refused to submit to induction and power thereby to cancel the induction order with which the registrant has refused to comply. This power is, if exercised, no more than a sua sponte response by the board to reexamination of its own proceedings. The registrant, however, has no right to a re-opening at this time. If the board chooses to stand on its record the registrant cannot assert prejudice resulting from that choice.”
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.