Fein v. Selective Serv. System Local Bd. No. 7 of Yonkers’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
146 federal appellate · 30 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 211 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2011 · most notably Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Wichita Board of Trade (1973), Dia v. Ashcroft (2003)
146 federal appellate · 30 district · 4 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedFein v. Selective Service System Local Board No. 7 (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Relies on Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · McKart v. United States · Jenkins v. McKeithen · Greene v. McElroy
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 211 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Thus Oestereich, [Oestereich v. Selective Service System Local Board, 393 U.S. 233 , 89 S.Ct. 414 , 21 L.Ed.2d 402 ] Gabriel, [Clark v. Gabriel, 393 U.S. 256 , 89 S.Ct. 424 , 21 L.Ed.2d 418 ] Breen, [Breen v. Selective Service Local Board, 396 U.S. 460 , 90 S.Ct. 661 , 24 L.Ed.2d 653 ] and Boyd [Boyd v. Clark, 287 F.Supp. 561 (S.D.N.Y.1968)] together establish the principles (a) that § 10(b)(3) does not foreclose pre-induction judicial review in that rather rare instance where administrative action, based on reasons unrelated to the merits of the claim to exemption or deferment, deprives the registrant of the classification to which, otherwise and eoncededly, he is entitled by statute, and (b) that § 10(b)(3) does foreclose pre-induction judicial review in the more common situation where the board, authoritatively, has used its discretion and judgment in determining facts and in arriving at a classification for the registrant.””
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“turned 'on the weight and credibility of the testimony,' * * * [a]nd it was 'dependent upon an act of judgment by the board.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[T]he Government has now taken the position that ‘[a]lthough this judicial rule [of Haughton and its progeny] finds little support in early precedent . we do not think it appropriate to contend that it is erroneous.’ The Government also notes that the requirement for an administrative statement of reasons ‘seems fully consistent with the new statutory and regulatory provisions on this point.’ . “While Joseph also is a conviction case and is not one on pre-induction review, its obvious significance for Fein is that if the doctor is ever again called for induction, the rule of Haughton will provide a defense for him unless and until the requirements of the new statute and regulations are fulfilled.””
2 later decisions 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.