United States ex rel. Furst v. Curran
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
We have recently dwelt upon the proper procedure in eases like this in Bicloszycka’s Case (C. C. A.) 3 F.(2d) 551. The hearing before the departmental officers was entirely proper, and there was abundant evidence to support tbe findings of tbe Board of Special Inquiry. The hearing having been fair, and the law not having been misapplied, the courts have no power to set aside a board’s findings of fact. La Reddola’s Case (C. C. A.) 299 F. 592; Haft’s Case (C. C. A.) 300 F. 918.
It has been suggested that Brugnoli’s Case (C. C. A.) 300 F. 918, is inconsistent. What was there said must be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States ex rel. Haft v. TodCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
- States ex rel. La Reddola v. TodCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
- United States ex rel. Bieloszycka v. Commissioner of ImmigrationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States Ex Rel. Powlowec v. DayCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929