Legal Opinion
China Mail S. S. Co. v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 2, 1923No. 3863PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The appellant contends that it was error to hold that under section 10 of, the act of February 5, 1917, it was the absolute duty of those engaged in bringing aliens to a seaport of the United States to prevent under all circumstances the landing of aliens at any time or place other than that designated by the immigration officers, and that the penalty of the section will apply if the alien effects his escape from the vessel without their knowledge or consent, and notwithstanding that they may have exercised due diligence and taken every reasonable and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- H. Hackfeld & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Grant Bros. Construction Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Standard Oil Co. of Indiana v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1908
- United States v. New York Cent. & H. R. R.District Court, N.D. New York · 1916
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Detroit Trust Co. v. the Thomas BarlumSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Navigazione Libera Triestina v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- The LimonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- Cosulich Line of Trieste v. EltingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- The HabanaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.