United States v. Chudy’s Empirical Analysis
474 F.2d 1069 · 1973
Citation profile
18 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently August 1993
18 federal appellate ·
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 Crest Finance Co. v. United States · Bartchy v. United States · Venus v. United States · Ward v. United States · United States v. Ebey
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The failure to furnish the draft board with a home address does not constitute a violation of the regulation with which the appellant was charged. United States v. Munns, 457 F.2d 271 (9th Cir. 1972). A registrant is not required to report his every move to the board. He is required to provide a suitable means for being reached by the board. Bartchy v. United States, 319 U.S. 484 , 63 S.Ct. 1206 , 87 L.Ed. 1534 (1943); United States v. Ebey, 424 F.2d 376 (10th Cir. 1970). ( 474 F.2d at 1070 .)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It shall be the duty of each registrant to keep his local board advised at all times of the address where mail will reach him. * * *.”
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.