Beard v. Stahr

Supreme Court

Beard v. Stahr

370 U.S. 41, 82 S. Ct. 1105, 8 L. Ed. 2d 321, 1962 U.S. LEXIS 1196

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMay 28, 1962

Docket648

StatusPublished

Cited by53 cases

This text of 370 U.S. 41 (Beard v. Stahr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beard v. Stahr, 370 U.S. 41, 82 S. Ct. 1105, 8 L. Ed. 2d 321, 1962 U.S. LEXIS 1196 (1962).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the District Court is vacated and the cause is remanded with directions to dismiss the complaint. The action is premature. The appellant will not be removed from the active list of the Regular Army unless the Secretary of the Army exercises the discretionary authority to remove him conferred by 10 U. S. C. § 3794. The Secretary has not stated that he will so exercise his discretion as to remove appellant. If the Secretary does not remove the appellant it will be unnecessary [42]*42to pass on the constitutional objections which have been urged. If appellant is removed, the Court is satisfied that adequate procedures for seeking redress will be open to him. Compare Aircraft & Diesel Corp. v. Hirsch, 331 U. S. 752, 772-773. Accordingly, the application for a stay is denied.

The Chief Justice is of the opinion that further consideration of the question of jurisdiction should be postponed to the hearing of the case on the merits and would grant the application for a stay.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter took no part in the decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the District Court is vacated and the cause is remanded with directions to dismiss the complaint. The action is premature. The appellant will not be removed from the active list of the Regular Army unless the Secretary of the Army exercises the discretionary authority to remove him conferred by 10 U. S. C. § 3794. The Secretary has not stated that he will so exercise his discretion as to remove appellant. If the Secretary does not remove the appellant it will be unnecessary [42]*42to pass on the constitutional objections which have been urged. If appellant is removed, the Court is satisfied that adequate procedures for seeking redress will be open to him. Compare Aircraft & Diesel Corp. v. Hirsch, 331 U. S. 752, 772-773. Accordingly, the application for a stay is denied.

The Chief Justice is of the opinion that further consideration of the question of jurisdiction should be postponed to the hearing of the case on the merits and would grant the application for a stay.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter took no part in the decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

370 U.S. 41, 82 S. Ct. 1105, 8 L. Ed. 2d 321, 1962 U.S. LEXIS 1196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beard-v-stahr-scotus-1962.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack