Legal Opinion
Isobel Moore v. Donald E. Johnson
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 28, 1978No. 75-2717PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SNEED, Circuit Judge:
This case nicely illustrates the constitutional procedural due process screen through which tolerably plain and straightforward statutory provisions sometimes must pass in order to discover their meaning as intended by Congress and as compelled by the Constitution, as interpreted by the courts. The principal statutes are 38 U.S.C. §§ 211 and 610 and the screen is derived from the Fifth Amendment. Whether the screen is necessary in this case depends, as will appear, on how the plaintiffs’ complaint is characterized.
The district court dismissed the complaint on the grounds…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Arnett v. KennedySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Rank v. NimmoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Veterans for Common Sense v. ShinsekiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Stephen H. Demarest v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Calvin Rosen v. Harry N. Walters, Director of the Veterans Administration, and the Veterans AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Robert E. Devine, and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. Max Cleland, Etc., Robert E. Devine v. Max Cleland, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.