10 U.S.C. § 372
Renumbered § 272]
[renumbered]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1939–2017 · leading case: Laurie Wood v. United States, 845 F.3d 123 (4th Cir. 2017).
Laurie Wood v. United States, 845 F.3d 123 (4th Cir. 2017). “By statute, the Department of Defense is authorized to make military facilities such as the Northwest Annex available to state and local civilian law enforcement officers for training purposes, 10 U.S.C. § 372 , and to train civilian officers to use those facilities, id.”
United States v. Tyronski Johnson, 410 F.3d 137 (4th Cir. 2005). “” 10 U.S.C. § 372 (a). Thus, Congress clearly has authorized the use of the equipment and facilities of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology to perform blood tests for civilian law enforcement agencies like the U.”
United States v. Michael Dreyer, 804 F.3d 1266 (9th Cir. 2015). “See 10 U.S.C. §§ 372–374, 379–382. 12 UNITED STATES V.”
Wimberly v. Deacon, 144 P.2d 447 (Okla. 1943). “154, 10 U. S. C. § 372 . This provision seems to suggest, however, that from the viewpoint of the federal government, at least, such officers, when they are on active duty, are deemed to be persons holding an office of trust or profit under the government of the United States.”
United States v. Yunis, 681 F. Supp. 891 (D.D.C. 1988). “” 10 U.S.C. § 372 (emphasis added). This includes the assignment of military personnel, provided such assignment is done in accordance with adequate regulation and in compliance with applicable law.”
Morgenthau v. Barrett, 108 F.2d 481 (D.C. Cir. 1939). “…83 P. 77 . 36 Op. Atty. Gen., 389, 399. 105 U.S. 244, 246 , 26 L.Ed. 985 . 29 Op. Atty. Gen. 397. 10 U.S.C.A. § 369 . 10 U.S.C.A. § 372 .”
United States v. Garcia, 909 F. Supp. 334 (D. Maryland 1995). “10 U.S.C. §§ 372 & 374 (Supp.1995). The Secretary of Defense has designated military dogs as “equipment” and required military handlers to accompany the dogs as “operators” of the equipment.”
United States v. Gerena, 649 F. Supp. 1179 (D. Conn. 1986). “First, 10 U.S.C. § 372 provides that, [t]he Secretary of Defense may, in accordance with other applicable law, make available any equipment, base facility, or research facility of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps to any Federal, State, or local civilian law enforcement…”
Use of Navy Drug-Detecting Dogs by Civilian Postal Inspectors (OLC 1989). “” 10 U.S.C. § 372 . No one has questioned (and we have no reason to doubt) that drug-detecting dogs are to be considered “equipment” for pur poses o f this provision.”
Use of Dep't of Def. Drug-Detecting Dogs to Aid in Civilian Law Enf't (OLC 1989). “” 10 U.S.C. § 372 . The Secretary o f Defense is also authorized to assign personnel to train civilian law enforcement officials in the operation and maintenance o f loaned equip ment.”
McFadden v. Kessler, 50 Pa. D. & C. 20 (1944). “It is also to be noted that the Federal Government, by an Act of 1933, 10 U. S. C. §372 , provided that a member of the Officers’ Reserve Corps while not on active duty, should not be considered an officer or employe of the United States.”
Fed. Employes as Notaries Pub., 71 Pa. D. & C. 365 (1950). “841, as amended, 10 U. S. C. §372 . It follows that each application by a Federal employe for appointment as a notary public must be decided upon its facts, and a determination must be made as to whether or not the Federal employe can perform the duties of a notary public while…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.