Craycroft v. Ferrall, 397 U.S. 335 (1970). · Go Syfert
Search
Craycroft v. Ferrall, 397 U.S. 335 (1970). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
40 citation events across 19 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Engelmann v. Westergard (nev, 1982-06-29) · Strongest negative: Roberts v. Commanding General (mdd, 1970-06-09)
Treatment trajectory · 1970 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1970 1998 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "but see" Roberts v. Commanding General
D. Maryland · 1970 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see Craycroft v. Ferrall, 408 F.2d 587 (9th Cir. 1969), vacated and remanded, 397 U.S. 335 , 90 S.Ct. 1152 , 25 L.Ed.2d 351 (1970).
cited Cited "see" Engelmann v. Westergard
Nev. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
Gardner v. Pierce County Bd. of Com’rs, 27 Wash.App. 241 , 617 P.2d 743 (1980); see Craycroft v. Ferrall, 408 F.2d 587 (9th Cir. 1969) (vacated on other grounds, 397 U.S. 335 (1970).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Glens Falls Insurance
N.D.N.Y. · 1981 · signal: see · confidence high
See Craycroft v. Ferrall, 408 F.2d 587 (9th Cir. 1969), vacated and remanded, 397 U.S. 335 , 90 S.Ct. 1152 , 25 L.Ed.2d 351 .
discussed Cited "see" Joseph P. Rolles v. Civil Service Commission (2×)
D.C. Cir. · 1975 · signal: see · confidence high
See Craycroft v. Ferrall, 397 U.S. 335 , 90 S.Ct. 1152 , 25 L.Ed.2d 351 (1970), vacating, Craycroft v. Ferrall, 408 F.2d 587 (9th Cir. 1969). . 416 U.S. at 211 , 95 S.Ct. at 1670 (dissenting opinion of Marshall, J., joined by Douglas and Brennan, JJ.), 166, 95 S.Ct. 1649 (concurring and dissenting opinion of Powell, J., joined by Blackmun, J.), and 185, 94 S.Ct. 1652 (concurring and dissenting opinion of White, J.).
discussed Cited "see" Brown v. United States
E.D. Pa. · 1973 · signal: see · confidence high
See the order vacating the Ninth Circuit’s decision requiring such exhaustion in Craycroft v. Ferrall, 397 U.S. 335 , 90 S.Ct. 1152 , 25 L.Ed.2d 351 (1970) and the explanation of that action in Parisi v. Davidson, 405 U.S. 34 at 38 footnote 3, 92 S.Ct. 815 .
discussed Cited "see" Jose Manuel Quijada Gaxiola v. United States (2×)
9th Cir. · 1970 · signal: see · confidence high
See Craycroft v. Ferrall, 397 U.S. 335 , 90 S.Ct. 1152 . 25 L.Ed.2d 351 (1970), rev’g 408 F.2d 587 (9th Cir. 1969); Reetz v. Bozanicli, 397 U.S. 82 , 90 S.Ct. 788 , 25 L.Ed.2d 68 (1970), rev’g D.C., 297 F.Supp. 300 (D.Alaska 1969) ; Parks v. Simpson Timber Co., 388 U.S. 459 , 87 S.Ct. 2115 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1319 (1967), rev’g 369 F.2d 324 (9th Cir. 1966).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Depino v. Officer
D. Conn. · 1971 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Craycroft v. Ferrall, 408 F.2d 587, 595 (9 Cir. 1969), vacated 397 U.S. 335 , 90 S.Ct. 1152 , 25 L.Ed.2d 351 (1970); Noyd v. McNamara, 378 F.2d 538 (10 Cir. 1967); Weber v. Clifford, 289 F.Supp. 960 (D.Md.1968); Rank v. Gleszer, 288 F.Supp. 174, 175 (D.Colo. 1968).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
CRAYCROFT
v.
FERRALL Et Al.
718, Misc.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 18, 1970.
397 U.S. 335
John Caughlan for petitioner., Solicitor General Grisioold for respondents.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 34 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

Upon consideration of the suggestion of the Solicitor General and upon an examination of the entire record, the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded to that court.

The Solicitor General concedes that the administrative remedies that the Court of Appeals held should first be exhausted by the petitioner, have either been exhausted or are nonexistent. The sole remaining question therefore seems to be whether petitioner’s failure to seek relief in the Court of Military Appeals precludes consideration of petitioner’s claims by the federal courts. While the Solicitor General concedes that resort to that judicial remedy does not preclude consideration of petitioner’s claim by the federal courts, there is a conflict among the circuits. It is for consideration of that question, or alternatively the merits, that the case is remanded.