Legal Opinion

United States Ex Rel. Lee Kum Hoy v. Shaughnessy

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided September 17, 1953PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DIMOCK, District Judge.

The three relators in this habeas corpus proceeding are natives of China who claim United States citizenship by virtue of the United States citizenship of the man whom they allege to be their father. They have been excluded from entry on the ground that this relationship has not been proved. They raise, among others, the point that they were denied due process in the introduction and use of reports of blood grouping tests in the proceedings resulting in their exclusion. The reports upon which the Board of Special Inquiry acted in excluding relators and upon which the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kwock Jan Fat v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  2. Kessler v. StreckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  3. Jordan v. MaceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1949
  4. United States ex rel. Chu Leung v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
  5. Quan Hing Sun v. WhiteCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1918

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. United States Ex Rel. Ott v. ShaughnessyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953
  2. United States ex rel. Dong Wing Ott v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
  3. United States Ex Rel. Kusman v. District Director of Immigration & NaturalizationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953
  4. United States ex rel. Lee Kum Hoy v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
  5. United States ex rel. Lee Kum Hoy v. ShaughnessyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1954

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

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

Powered by the Exa API