United States v. O'Bryan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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

1. ““The ‘basis in fact’ test actually involves two steps. At the threshold, the reviewing court must determine, on the basis of the registrant’s submitted . . . material, whether the registrant has made out a prima facie case .... Where it is clear that a prima facie case was established, we conclude that in conscientious objector cases, it is essential to the validity of an order to report that the board state its basis of decision and the reasons therefor . . . . ” United States v. O’Bryan, supra, 450 F.2d at 368, 371 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Price · Ware v. Commanding General, Fort Campbell, Kentucky

2. “[The] statement [of the local board] must set forth a 'rational basis' for its determination. . . . 20 Although not accepted unanimously by the circuits, the requirement that a local board articulate its reasons for denial of conscientious objector status has been accepted with reasoned accord. . . . 21 We are convinced that, absent a statement of reasons from the local board in the registrant's selective service file, a court cannot properly perform the function of review set forth in [Estep v. United States, 327 U.S. 114 , 66 S.Ct. 423, 90 L.Ed. 567 (1946)]. . . . By the same token, a reviewing court faced with a silent file may only speculate as to what factors motivated a given determination. . . . Unless it is known which ground among the many upon which the board may have relied, it is often impossible to perform the function of review even within the narrow scope of the selective service context.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. McAliley v. Birdsong

3. ““The ‘basis in fact’ test actually involves two steps. At the threshold, the reviewing court must determine, on the basis of the registrant’s submitted Selective Service Form 150 and supplemental material, whether the registrant has made out a prima facie case for entitlement to classification as a conscientious objector.” United States v. O’Bryan, 450 F.2d 365 , 368 (6th Cir. 1971). See United States v. Iverson, 455 F.2d 79 , 81 (8th Cir. 1972); United States v. Wood, 454 F.2d 765 , 767 (4th Cir. 1972); United States v. Stetter, 445 F.2d 472 , 477 (5th Cir. 1971).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Hanson