Legal Opinion

United States v. Karnuth

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided March 5, 1928No. 274PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MANTON, Circuit Judge.

Mary Cook, a British subject, and Antonio Danelon, a naturalized citizen of Canada and a British subject, sued out a writ of habeas corpus to review proceedings of the Board of Special Inquiry of the Immigration Service, which held that they should be refused admission to the United States because they had no unexpired Consular immigration visas, as required by the Immigration Act of 1924 (8 USCA §§ 166, 167, 179, 201-226), and pursuant to rule 86 promulgated by the Department of Labor.

Danelon worked at Niagara Balls, but lived in the Dominion of Canada. Mary Cook,…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  2. Missouri v. HollandSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  3. Chew Heong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  4. Geofroy v. RiggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  5. In Re RossSupreme Court of the United States · 1891

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Artukovic v. BoyleDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1952
  2. Grant v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1996
  3. United States ex rel. Graber v. KarnuthCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
  4. (PC) O'Brien v. SaidDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
  5. Charles Baring Travers Grant v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court · 1993

1 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