Legal Opinion
Irby v. United States, Department of the Army
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided February 14, 2003No. CIV.A. 203CV54PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
The plaintiff has filed a complaint challenging the legality of an order requiring him to serve on active duty as an enlisted soldier in the United States Army. On January 23, 2003, the court granted the plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and allowed the plaintiff to amend his complaint to reflect a claim for habeas relief. On February 4, 2003, the court heard oral argument with respect to the plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction. Based on the briefs submitted by the parties, the testimony of the witnesses, the arguments of…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Blackwelder Furniture Company of Statesville, Inc. v. Seilig Manufacturing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
- Direx Israel, Ltd. Direx, Incorporated v. Breakthrough Medical Corporation Zvi Porath Avner SpectorCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1992
- Capt. Milbert Mindes v. Dr. Robert C. Seaman, Secretary of the United States Air ForceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
- Daryl B. Lundgrin v. W. Graham Claytor, Secretary of the Navy of the United States, and the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1980
- Richardson v. MorrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Qualls v. RumsfeldDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2005
- Spadone v. McHughDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Parrish v. BrownleeDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2004
- United States v. ChrzanowskiDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2005
- Qualls v. RumsfeldDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2005
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.