In Goldsmith, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces could not enjoin the Secretary of the Air Force from administratively discharging an airman simply because that airman was also serving out a sentence imposed by court-martial.
Summary of this case from Stanton v. JacobsonNo. 98-21.
November 2, 1998.
Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 181 111. 2d 373, 692 N. E. 2d 1167.
In Goldsmith, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces could not enjoin the Secretary of the Air Force from administratively discharging an airman simply because that airman was also serving out a sentence imposed by court-martial.
Summary of this case from Stanton v. JacobsonFull title:MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER SMITH INC. ET AL. v. ROUBIK
Court:U.S.
Date published: Nov 2, 1998
The job description is normally of foremost importance, Jimenez Fuentes v. Torres Gaztambide, 807 F.2d 236,…
Villanueva-Mendez v. Nieves-VazquezSupreme Court doctrine, creating such a constitutional claim under the aegis of the First Amendment,…