CUNARD STEAM-SHIP CO., LTD.,

v.

JOHN T. CLARK & SON

Citator

Cited By (49 total)

• Clay v. United States, 403 U.S. 698 (U.S. 1971)
  …ufficient to establish his subjective belief where, as here, his conscientious-objector claim was not asserted jmtil military service became imminent. Campbell v. United States, 221 F. 2d 454. " United States v. Corliss, 280 F. 2d 808, cert. denied, 364 U. S. 884.” In this Court the Government has now fully conceded that the petitioner’s beliefs are based upon “religious training and belief,” as defined in United States v. Seeger, supra: “There is no dispute that petitioner’s professed beliefs were founded…
• Nw. Wholesale Stationers, Inc. v. Pac. Stationery & Printing Co., 472 U.S. 284 (U.S. 1985)
  …hat the cooperative’s decision to expel Pacific was a “combination or conspiracy” affecting interstate commerce within the meaning of § 1 of the Sherman Act. See, e. g., American Motor Specialties Co. v. FTC, 278 F. 2d 225, 229 (CA2), cert. denied, 364 U. S. 884 (1960). Because Pacific has not been wholly excluded from access to Northwest’s wholesale operations, there is perhaps some question whether the challenged activity is properly characterized as a concerted refusal to deal. To be precise, Northwest’…
• United States v. Gearey, 368 F.2d 144 (2d Cir. 1966)
  …l board in writing any fact that might result in the registrant being placed in a different classification * * 32 O.F.R. § 1625.1(6). See Keene v. United States, supra, 266 F. 2d at 384. In United States v. Corliss, 280 F. 2d 808, 812, cert. denied, 364 U.S. 884, 81 S.Ct. 167, 5 L.Ed.2d 105 (1960), we inferentially approved the application of that section to conscientious objector claims. . See Keene v. United States, 266 F. 2d 378, 384 (1959). But see United States v. Taylor, 351 F. 2d 228 (6 Cir. 1965);…