Legal Opinion
McCullough v. Seamans
District Court, E.D. California
Decided July 31, 1972No. Civ. S-2127, S-2275PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MacBRIDE, Chief Judge.
These two companion eases present an important and novel question concerning the obligations which conscientious objectors owe to their country. Simply put, the issue is whether Air Force Academy graduates who have secured their discharges as conscientious objectors before completing their active duty assignments must reimburse the Air Force for the cost of their educations.
Shortly after graduating from the Air Force Academy, both McCullough and Joy enrolled in law school under extended leave programs, thus deferring their active duty commitments for…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. Standard Oil Co. Of CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- United States v. GilmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Richard A. Miller v. The Honorable John A. Chafee, Secretary of the Navy, and J. D. Stevens, Cdr., Commander Escort Squadron OneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
3Cited by4 opinions
- Richard D. Smith v. Melvin Laird, the Secretary of DefenseCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1973
- Bruce v. United States ArmyDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1981
- Dennis Wayne Mosley v. Commanding Officer, Ellsworth Air Force BaseCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1973
- Singer v. Secretary of the Air ForceDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1974