Legal Opinion
Piercy v. Tarr
District Court, N.D. California
Decided June 1, 1972No. C-72 448, C-72 458PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ZIRPOLI, District Judge.
Plaintiffs are selective service registrants classified as conscientious objectors (I-O) by the Selective Service System. The thrust of their complaint is twofold: First, plaintiffs complain that they are being ordered to report for alternate civilian employment, at a time when comparable registrants classified I-A and I-A-0 are not being ordered to report for induction, in violation of Section 6(j) of the Military Selective Service Act and the regulations adopted pursuant thereto. Second, the plaintiffs attack the promulgation of those informal…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Oestereich v. Selective Service System Local Board No. 11Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Breen v. Selective Service Local Board No. 16Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Clark v. GabrielSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- National Student Association, Inc. v. Lewis B. HersheyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
- Boyd v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Jackie Anderson v. Earl Butz, as Secretary of the Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
- Aiken v. ObledoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 1977
- Gilman J. Chasse v. Robert E. ChasenCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1979
- Local 2677, American Federation of Government Employees v. PhillipsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1973
- Appalachian Power Co. v. TrainCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.