KING, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PENSIONS AND SECURITY, ET AL.

v.

SMITH ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Schatten v. United States: Gen. Leonard Chapman, 419 F.2d 187 (6th Cir. 1969)
  …their valid jurisdiction will not be reviewed by the federal courts. E.g., Winters v. United States, 281 F.Supp. 289 (E.D. N.Y.1968); aff’d. per curiam, 390 F. 2d 879 (2d Cir. 1968) cert. den. 391 U.S. 910, 88 S.Ct. 1800, 20 L.Ed.2d 650, cert. den. 390 U.S. 993, 88 S.Ct. 1193, 20 L.Ed.2d 93; Winters v. United States, 412 F. 2d 140 (9th Cir. 1969); Fox v. Brown, 402 F. 2d 837 (2d Cir. 1968). Our reluctance to review discretionary military orders does not imply that any action by the Marines, even one viol…
• Private Paul v. Winters, Jr., 412 F.2d 140 (9th Cir. 1969)
  …n months, “by reason of your unsatisfactory participation in reserve training.” The orders were based on the same missed double drill of August 29, 1967. The Supreme Court denied his application for reconsideration of application for temporary stay, 390 U.S. 993, 88 S.Ct. 1193, 20 L.Ed.2d 93, on May 20, 1968, and back to Camp Pendleton he went, on May 28, 1968. He was not to give in so easily, however. [*143] After he had completed 45 days of involuntary active duty, he filed a second petition for a writ of…
• Morse v. Boswell, 393 U.S. 802 (U.S. 1968)
  …retaries of the Military Departments, April 11, 1968, as cited in Brief for Appellants 5, Morse v. Boswell, 401 F. 2d 544. Joint Message form DA 859314, April 11, 1968, as cited in Brief for Appellants, ibid. Applicant in Winters v. United States, 390 U. S. 993, had been called to duty as an individual rather than as part of a unit; and unlike applicants in these cases, apparently did not challenge the authority of the Secretary of the Army to call him for a full 24 months of active duty irrespective of ti…