Mcmicking v. Metcalf

Ninth Circuit

Mcmicking v. Metcalf

462 F.2d 129, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 8891

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 20, 1972

Docket71-2002

StatusPublished

This text of 462 F.2d 129 (Mcmicking v. Metcalf) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mcmicking v. Metcalf, 462 F.2d 129, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 8891 (9th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

462 F.2d 129

Alfred L. McMICKING, Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
Lt. Col. Jack A. METCALF, Commanding Officer, Armed Forces
Examining and Entrance Station, Oakland,
California, Stanley R. Resor as
Secretary of the Army of the
United States,
Respondents-
Appellants.

No. 71-2002.

United States Court of Appeals,

Ninth Circuit.

June 20, 1972.

Richard F. Locke, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), James L. Browning, U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for respondents-appellants.

Anthony F. Granucci (argued), of Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges, San Francisco, Cal., Robert L. Henn, of Angell, Adams & Holmes, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner-appellee.

Before CHAMBERS and BROWNING, Circuit Judges, and SHARP,* District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

There is sufficient evidence in the record to support the finding that the notification of classification was not mailed to petitioner "as soon as practicable." 32 C.F.R. 1623.4(a). The trial court found this prejudiced the petitioner. Thus, we cannot find that it acted improperly in ordering his release from the Army. See Knox v. United States, 200 F.2d 398 (9th Cir. 1952).

The order appealed from is affirmed.

*

The Honorable Morell E. Sharp, United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation

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