Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 486 F.2d 307 - Smith v. Laird

Smith v. Laird’s Empirical Analysis

486 F.2d 307 · 1973

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
July 1991
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 5 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently July 1991

9 federal appellate · 5 district ·

140197319801990decided

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 38 U.S.C. § 3103

Relies on United States v. Seeger · Dickinson v. United States · Welsh II v. United States · Witmer v. United States · Gillette v. United States

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

  1. ““ . . . the government must show some hard reliable provable facts which would provide a basis for disbelieving the applicant’s sincerity, or it must show something concrete in the record which substantially blurs the picture painted by the applicant.” Smith v. Laird, 486 F.2d 307, 310 , 10th Cir. 1973.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It has been held . . . that the filing of an application for classification as a conscientious objector after receipt of orders to report to a combat zone is in and of itself insufficient grounds for denying an application. See e. g., Tressan v. Laird, 454 F.2d 761 (9th Cir. 1972); Rothfuss v. Resor, 443 F.2d 554 (5th Cir. 1971).” (emphasis added)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““We feel that the decision to impose conditions, if any, on the discharge of in-service conscientious objectors, including those who have had a portion or all of their education paid for by the armed forces, is a question which should be resolved in the Congress and not in the federal courts on a case by case basis.””
    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.