TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Jerry K. Clark v. Dr. Harold Brown, Secretary of the Air Force

Jerry K. CLARK Et Al., v. Dr. Harold BROWN, Secretary of the Air Force, Appellant

Clark v. Brown, 414 F.2d 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
May 29, 1969
Docket
No. 22906_1
Judges
Bazelon, Leventhal, Per Curiam, Robinson
Citations
414 F.2d 1159134 U.S. App. D.C. 2631969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12181

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

This case involves the question whether plaintiffs, appellees in this court, are members of the Ready Reserve of the Air Force or the Standby Reserve. When they were asked, on the occasion of their annual military personnel record review, to renew or extend their agreement to stay in the Ready Reserve, they declined to do so. Since plaintiffs already had the requisite military service specified by regulations, they were entitled to terminate their ready reserve status. As District Judge Gasch pointed out in his opinion, the pertinent Air Force regulations provide expressly: “If at that time [annual military personnel record review] the member does not renew his Ready Reserve Agreement, he will be immediately reassigned”

1

to the Standby Reserve. We agree with the reasoning of Judge Gasch that this operated to transfer plaintiffs outside the group of members who were subject to call up as members of the Ready Reserve.

This construction is fortified by the fact, which we have ascertained on further inquiry, that the standard ready reserve agreement prescribed by regulations only obligates the member to stay in the reserve for the period expiring with his annual military personnel record review. The government argues that the Air Force regulations are for the benefit of the Air Force not the members of the reserve; that the undertaking of the Air Force to transfer the member to the Standby Reserve is not self-executing and he must also make application therefor. We attach no decisive consequence to the fact that the *1160 members’ position was not set forth in a formal writing. Their oral statements came at a time of undoubted significance to all concerned, the occasion of the annual Military Personnel Record Review prescribed by regulation pursuant to statutory provision, see 10 U.S.C. § 271 (1964). That is enough. These members of the Ready Reserve are entitled to be treated as though the Air Force had complied with its own regulations, including the procedures provided for obtaining the consent of the state governor to the transfer to the Standby Reserve.

Affirmed.

1

. Air Force Manual 35-3, para. 39-7 (c) (2) (a).

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1972: 219722026peak 1972 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Clark v. United States461 F.2d 781 (Ct. Cl. 1972)
  2. David A. Konn v. Hon. Melvin R. Laird460 F.2d 1318 (7th Cir. 1972)

Most recent

  1. Clark v. United States461 F.2d 781 (Ct. Cl. 1972)
  2. David A. Konn v. Hon. Melvin R. Laird460 F.2d 1318 (7th Cir. 1972)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list