Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

United States v. Hoard

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided October 13, 1981No. SPCM 15053PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

FULTON, Senior Judge:

The appellant challenges the lawfulness of United States Army Training Center and Fort Dix (New Jersey) Regulation Number 600-2, dated 31 January 1979, as changed by Change 1, dated 8 May 1979. Among other things, the regulation prohibits persons assigned full time to the training center (i. e., the “permanent party”) from engaging in unofficial personal associations with persons passing through the reception station or undergoing their initial Army training at Fort Dix. Pertinent portions of the regulation are set forth in the Appendix.

Before a…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Parker v. LevySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. United States v. ScobyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1978
  3. United States v. MeansUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
  4. United States v. LinyearU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1977
  5. United States v. SmithUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1975

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. United States v. WomackUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
  2. United States v. StockenU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1984
  3. United States v. Van SteenwykU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1985
  4. United States v. BrundidgeU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1985
  5. United States v. WilsonU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1991

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API