Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Stewart

District Court, S.D. California

Decided September 30, 1942No. 2341PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtYankwich, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above).

Except where an appeal is authorized, the Selective Service Act makes the decision of the Board on classification final. 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix § 310(a); see: United States ex rel. Broker v. Baird, D.C.N. Y.1941, 39 F.Supp. 392, 394. In the trial of cases for violations of the Act, the Judges of this district have declined to submit to the jury the question of the correctness of the classification. But they have allowed inquiry to determine whether there was a hearing. And, in submitting the question of guilt or innocence to the jury, we have, invariably,…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Mooney v. HolohanSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  3. Walker v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. McNally v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  5. Smith v. O'GRADYSupreme Court of the United States · 1941

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. United States v. EstepCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945
  2. Kauble v. HaynesDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1946
  3. Ex parte KelleyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1943
  4. United States ex rel. Levy v. CainDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1944
  5. Hirabayashi v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API