green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.8 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1991 ·
…a regular officer cannot legally receive a stigma-type discharge after mere administrative proceedings of any kind
⚠ not in text
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
James Andrew Thomas v. Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense, and Michael P.W. Stone, Secretary of the Army
(2×)
a regular officer cannot legally receive a stigma-type discharge after mere administrative proceedings of any kind
discussed
Cited "see"
Charles Robert Rucker v. Secretary of the Army
See Carter v. United States, 509 F.2d 1150 (Ct.Cl. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1076 , 96 S.Ct. 861 , 47 L.Ed.2d 86 (1976), reh. denied, 424 U.S. 950 , 96 S.Ct. 1423 , 47 L.Ed.2d 356 (1976); Doyle v. United States, 599 F.2d 984 , 220 Ct.Cl. 285 (Ct.Cl.1980); amended In re Doyle, 609 F.2d 990 , 220 Ct.Cl. 326 (Ct.Cl.1980), ce rt. denied, 446 U.S. 982 , 100 S.Ct. 2961 , 64 L.Ed.2d 837 (1980) ( 10 U.S.C. § 1552 confers the power to correct records in favor of a serviceman and never against him.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Baley v. United States
Cir. 1990); see also Carter v. United States, 207 Ct.Cl. 316, 318 , 518 F.2d 1199, 1199 (1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1076 , 96 S.Ct. 861 , 47 L.Ed.2d 86 , reh’g denied, 424 U.S. 950 , 96 S.Ct. 1423 , 47 L.Ed.2d 356 (1976); Osage Tribe of Indians of Okla. v. United States, 97 Fed.Cl. 345, 348 (2011) (discussing RCFC 59(a) and 60(b)); Penga v. United States, 97 Fed.Cl. 80, 83 (2011) (discussing RCFC 59(a)); Webster v. United States, 92 Fed.Cl. 321, 324 , recons. denied, 93 Fed.Cl. 676 (2010) (discussing RCFC 60(b)); Alpha I, L.P. ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ogunniyi v. United States
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has stated that: “The decision whether to grant reconsideration lies largely within the discretion of the [trial] court.” Yuba Natural Res., Inc. v. United States, 904 F.2d 1577, 1583 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied (Fed.Cir.1990); see also Carter v. United States, 207 Ct.Cl. 316, 318 , 518 F.2d 1199, 1199 (1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1076 , 96 S.Ct. 861 , 47 L.Ed.2d 86 , reh’g denied, 424 U.S. 950 , 96 S.Ct. 1423 , 47 L.Ed.2d 356 (1976); Osage Tribe of Indians of Okla. v. United States, 97 Fed.Cl. 345, 348 (2011) (discussing RCFC 5…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fillmore Equipment of Holland, Inc. v. United States
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has stated that: “The decision whether to grant reconsideration lies largely within the discretion of the [trial] court.” Yuba Natural Res., Inc. v. United States, 904 F.2d 1577, 1583 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied (Fed.Cir. 1990); see also Carter v. United States, 207 Ct.Cl. 316, 318 , 518 F.2d 1199, 1199 (1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1076 , 96 S.Ct. 861 , 47 L.Ed.2d 86 , reh’g denied, 424 U.S. 950 , 96 S.Ct. 1423 , 47 L.Ed.2d 356 (1976); Osage Tribe of Indians of Okla. v. United States, 97 Fed.Cl. 345, 348 (2011) (discussing Rules…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Englewood Terrace Ltd. Partnership v. United States
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has stated that: “The decision whether to grant reconsideration lies largely within the discretion of the [trial] court.” Yuba Natural Res., Inc. v. United States, 904 F.2d 1577, 1583 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied (Fed.Cir.1990); see also Carter v. United States, 207 Ct.Cl. 316, 318 , 518 F.2d 1199, 1199 (1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1076 , 96 S.Ct. 861 , 47 L.Ed.2d 86 reh’g denied, 424 U.S. 950 , 96 S.Ct. 1423 , 47 L.Ed.2d 356 (1976); Webster v. United States, 92 Fed.Cl. 321, 324 , recons. denied, 93 Fed.Cl. 676 (2010); Alpha I, L…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Caserta v. Village of Dickinson
See also, Jimenez v. Hidalgo County Water Improvement District No. 2, 68 F.R.D. 668 (S.D.Tex.1975) (3-judge court), aff’d 424 U.S. 950 , 96 S.Ct. 1423 , 47 L.Ed.2d 357 (1975) (mem). 20 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mathews, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
v.
Williams
v.
Williams
No. 74-205.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 8, 1976.
C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of Mathews v. Eldridge, ante, p. 319.
Mr. Justice Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.