10 U.S.C. § 601
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2008–2023 · leading case: United States v. Ortiz, 76 M.J. 189 (C.A.A.F. 2017).
United States v. Ortiz, 76 M.J. 189 (C.A.A.F. 2017). “At any given time, therefore, the Court’s judges may have very little to do”), Just as military officers on active duty hold three- and four-star ranks only while assigned to billets carrying those ranks, see 10 U.S.C. § 601 (2012), so Colonel Mitchell and the others similarly…”
United States v. Sergeant ROBERT B. BERGDAHL (A.C.C.A. 2019). “See 10 U.S.C. § 601 . 11 BERGDAHL—ARMY 20170582 Applying the Boyce framework, the military judge ultimately concluded that the government met its burden to show no intolerable strain “and that an objective, disinterested observer, fully informed of all the facts and…”
BAE Sys. San Diego Ship Repair Inc. v. United States (S.D. Cal. 2023). “” 10 U.S.C. § 601 . 23 In June 2020, Vice Admiral William Galinis assumed command as the 45th Commander 24 of Naval Sea Systems Command.”
Promotions of Judge Advocates Gen. Under Section 543 of the Nat'l Def. Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (OLC 2008). “” 10 U.S.C. § 601 (a) (2000). The express distinction in section 601 between the “assign[ment]” to the “position” in question and the “appoint[ment]” to the specified officer “grade” associated with that position reflects the traditional understanding that the officer’s…”
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.