Legal Opinion
Cheng Ho Mui v. Rinaldi
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided October 11, 1966No. Civ. A. No. 368-66PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
COOLAHAN, District Judge:
The plaintiffs Cheng Ho Mui and Pun Yi Pan are Chinese nationals and aliens who entered the United States as non-immigrant crewmen. They proceeded to overstay the length of time which they were permitted to remain in this country.1
Deportation proceedings were instituted against them under the Immigra*260tion and Nationality Act. Both plaintiffs were afforded deportation hearings pursuant to Section 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], 8 U.S.C. § 1252. The plaintiffs were each found to be deportable, and in due course,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Foti v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Giova v. RosenbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Manuel Mendez and Teresa Lastra De Mendez v. H. I. Major, District Director of the Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1965
- Francesco Foti, A/K/A Frank Foti v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Daniel Robert Ryan v. Ohio Edison CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1979
- Yan Wo Cheng v. RinaldiDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1975
- Cheng Fan Kwok v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Chan Kwan Chung v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
- Alidede v. HurneyDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1969