Legal Opinion

United States ex rel. Lee Kum Hoy v. Shaughnessy

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided August 31, 1954PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DIMOCK, District Judge.

This writ of habeas corpus was originally sued out to attack the right of respondent to hold three persons of the Chinese race born in China who had been excluded from the United States. They had contended that they were American citizens by virtue of the citizenship of one Lee Ha whom they claimed as their father. They were then held pursuant to a determination of a Board of Special Inquiry rejecting the claim of paternity. The determination was based largely upon the results of blood tests which were held to preclude the possibility of the claimed paternity.

On a…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Bolling v. SharpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  3. Hirabayashi v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. Union Pacific Railway Co. v. BotsfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  5. Camden & Suburban Railway Co. v. StetsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1900

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. United States ex rel. Lee Kum Hoy v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
  2. United States ex rel. Lee Kum Hoy v. ShaughnessyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1955
  3. United States ex rel. Lee Kum Hoy, Lee Kum Cherk & Lee Moon Wah v. ShaughnessyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1955
  4. United States ex rel. Lee Kum Hoy v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
  5. United States v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API