Legal Opinion
Mendoza-Garcia v. Barr
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided March 13, 2019No. 18-3513PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JANE B. STRANCH, Circuit Judge.
Approximately six weeks before Rogelio Mendoza-Garcia's final removal hearing, his attorney warned him that he needed to comply with the terms of their retainer agreement-that is, to pay the attorney. Mendoza-Garcia did not pay and, one week before the hearing, his attorney filed a *502motion to withdraw. The immigration judge (IJ) granted the motion the day of the hearing. When Mendoza-Garcia requested a continuance to find a new attorney, the IJ denied the request, explaining that he would assist in developing the record. Mendoza-Garcia argues that the IJ violated…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Bridges v. WixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- The Japanese Immigrant CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Jack D. Lashley v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Svitlana Denko v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- United States v. Pedro Silvestre-GregorioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
- Hernandez Lara v. BarrCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2020
- United States v. Rosendo Valdivias-SotoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
- Carlos Alberto Lopez-Cruz v. Marc Fields, et al.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2026
- Doe v. BaumDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2019
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.