TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

George Mark Vasilj v. Local Board No. 134

George Mark VASILJ, Appellant, v. LOCAL BOARD NO. 134 Et Al., Appellees

Vasilj v. Local Bd. No. 134, 422 F.2d 861 (9th Cir. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 22, 1969
Docket
No. 23050
Judges
Duniway, Hufstedler, Pence, Per Curiam
Citations
422 F.2d 861

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Appellant registered with Local Board No. 134 and was initially classified II-S. Subsequently the board classified him I-A, and ordered him to report for induction, from which a timely appeal was taken. The appeal board upheld the I-A classification and ordered appellant to report forthwith. Appellant then filed suit in the district court for damages and for an injunction to prevent his immediate induction into the armed forces. The district court held that it lacked jurisdiction in light of 50 U.S.C. App. 460 (b) (3), 1

and this appeal followed.

Plaintiff-appellant urges that section 460(b) (3) of 50 U.S.C. App. is unconstitutional, as violative of the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. This issue is no longer open, having been decided adversely to this plaintiff by the case of Clark v. Gabriel, 1968, 393 U.S. 256 , 89 S.Ct. 424 , 21 L.Ed.2d 418 .

Further, plaintiff-appellant is found not to be within the coverage of the exception to section 460(b) (3) carved by the companion case of Oestereich v. Selective Service Board, 1968, 393 U.S. 233 , 89 S.Ct. 414 , 21 L.Ed.2d 402 .

For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the district court must be affirmed.

1

. Military Service Act of 1967, 50 U.S.C. App. 460(b) (3) provides, in relevant part:

“No judicial review shall be made of the classification or processing of any registrant by local boards, appeal boards, or the President, except as a defense to a criminal prosecution instituted under section 12 of this title, after the registrant has responded either affirmatively or negatively to an order to report for induction * *

How later courts describe this case

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

1970: 11971: 119702026peak 1970 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. George M. Vasilj v. United States425 F.2d 1134 (9th Cir. 1970)
  2. Francis L. McLain v. Selective Service Local Board No. 47, Etc.439 F.2d 737 (8th Cir. 1971)

Most recent

  1. Francis L. McLain v. Selective Service Local Board No. 47, Etc.439 F.2d 737 (8th Cir. 1971)
  2. George M. Vasilj v. United States425 F.2d 1134 (9th Cir. 1970)

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
Oestereich v. Selective Serv. Sys. Local Bd. No. 11, 393 U.S. 233 (1969) 372
Clark v. Gabriel, 393 U.S. 256 (1968) 124

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