Legal Opinion
John Doe 1 v. Rumsfeld
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided October 27, 2004No. CIV.A.03-707(EGS)PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SULLIVAN, District Judge.
I. Introduction
Six plaintiffs, known as John and Jane Doe # 1 through # 6, bring this action to challenge the lawfulness of the government’s Anthrax Vaccination Immunization Program (“AVIP”). Specifically, plaintiffs, who are members of the active duty or National Guardsmen components of the Armed Forces and civilian contract employees of the Department of Defense (“DoD”) who have submitted or have been instructed to submit to anthrax vaccinations without their consent pursuant to AVIP, have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment challenging the Food &…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Lujan v. National Wildlife FederationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Rempfer v. SharfsteinCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2009
- Doe v. RumsfeldDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007
- Bates v. DonleyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Martin v. DonleyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- United States v. KisalaCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2006
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.