Robb D. Hitchcock v. Melvin H. Laird, as Secretary of Defense

Fourth Circuit

Robb D. Hitchcock v. Melvin H. Laird, as Secretary of Defense

456 F.2d 1064, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11460

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 4, 1972

Docket71-1971

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 456 F.2d 1064 (Robb D. Hitchcock v. Melvin H. Laird, as Secretary of Defense) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robb D. Hitchcock v. Melvin H. Laird, as Secretary of Defense, 456 F.2d 1064, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11460 (4th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

After administrative denial of his request to be disenrolled as a member of the R.O.T.C. as a conscientious objector and his subsequent induction on active duty, 1 Hitchcock sought a writ of mandamus ordering the Army to grant his request for discharge as a conscientious objector. The District Court denied the petition on September 9, 1971, and this appeal followed.

Hitchcock has been Absent Without Leave since May 27, 1971, and on June 1 he was posted as a deserter. By taking this course of action, Hitchcock has indicated that he will comply with the decision of this court only if it is favorable. We believe that a party who will comply only with favorable judicial decisions is not entitled to have his claim heard. Johnson v. Laird, 9 Cir., 432 F.2d 77, 79. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, with leave to the petitioner to move the court to reinstate his appeal if he will surrender himself to the custody of the military authorities at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri within 30 days of the filing of this order.

Dismissed.

1

. His request for disenrollment was granted on other grounds, leading to his assignment to active duty in accordance with the terms of his contract.

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

PER CURIAM:

After administrative denial of his request to be disenrolled as a member of the R.O.T.C. as a conscientious objector and his subsequent induction on active duty, 1 Hitchcock sought a writ of mandamus ordering the Army to grant his request for discharge as a conscientious objector. The District Court denied the petition on September 9, 1971, and this appeal followed.

Hitchcock has been Absent Without Leave since May 27, 1971, and on June 1 he was posted as a deserter. By taking this course of action, Hitchcock has indicated that he will comply with the decision of this court only if it is favorable. We believe that a party who will comply only with favorable judicial decisions is not entitled to have his claim heard. Johnson v. Laird, 9 Cir., 432 F.2d 77, 79. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, with leave to the petitioner to move the court to reinstate his appeal if he will surrender himself to the custody of the military authorities at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri within 30 days of the filing of this order.

Dismissed.

1

. His request for disenrollment was granted on other grounds, leading to his assignment to active duty in accordance with the terms of his contract.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

456 F.2d 1064, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robb-d-hitchcock-v-melvin-h-laird-as-secretary-of-defense-ca4-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack