UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON-LINE

This is a companion case to Eagles v. U.S. ex rel. Samuels, ante p. 329 U. S. 304, in which most of the questions raised here were ruled upon. The principal differences in the facts are that the advisory panel was composed entirely of laymen, its report was marked "confidential," and respondent was enlarged upon a recognizance.

Held:

1. The case is not moot, for the reasons stated in the Samuels case. P. 329 U. S. 318.

2. The fact that the panel was composed entirely of laymen does not require a different result from that reached in the Samuels case. Pp. 329 U. S. 322-323.

3. The fact that its report was marked "confidential" contrary to the applicable regulations does not require a different result, because the local board was not required to keep the report confidential, and there is no showing that it did. P. 329 U. S. 323.

151 F.2d 801 reversed. clubjuris

Page 329 U. S. 318

Respondent, having been inducted into the Army, was released on a writ of habeas corpus after the Circuit Court of Appeals had reversed, 151 F.2d 801, a decision by the District Court adverse to him. This Court granted certiorari. 328 U.S. 830. Reversed, p. 329 U. S. 323.