Legal Opinion
Szehinskyj v. Attorney General of the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided December 13, 2005No. 04-3710PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FISHER, Circuit Judge.
At issue in this case is whether the • statutory language “assisted in persecution” means the same thing in the Displaced Persons Act of 1948 and the Holtzman Amendment of 1978. We hold that it does.
I
Petitioner Theodor Szehinskyj entered the United States in 1950 and was naturalized in 1958. He was denaturalized on July 24, 2000, following trial on the issue of whether he had illegally procured entry into the United States in 1950 under the Displaced Persons Act of 1948 (“DPA”), Pub.L. No. 80-774, 62 Stat. 1009, amended by Pub.L. No. 81-555, 64 Stat. 219 (1950). The DPA…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Auguste v. RidgeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Marek PARTYKA, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF the UNITED STATES, RespondentCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- George W. Henglein v. Colt Industries Operating CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Howard Hess Dental Laboratories Inc. v. Dentsply International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- S.H. Ex Rel. Durrell v. Lower Merion School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Jean Alexander Cosmetics, Inc. v. L'OreaL Usa, Inc. Redkin 5th Avenue, N.Y.CCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006
- United States v. GeiserCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- Cospito v. Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.