Legal Opinion
Sovich v. Esperdy
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 13, 1962PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEINFELD, District Judge.
The plaintiff brings this action for an order declaring arbitrary and capricious the Attorney General’s refusal to stay his deportation to Yugoslavia on the claim of physical persecution pursuant to section 243(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.1
The defendant moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A. upon the ground that there are no genuine issues of fact and that the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
The plaintiff, now thirty-seven years of age, was born in a town in Italy which,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Dolenz v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
- Bruno Blazina v. E. P. Bouchard, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization Service, New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1961
- United States ex rel. Leong Choy Moon v. ShaughnessyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
- United States Ex Rel. Tie Sing Eng v. MurffDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
- United States ex rel. Tie Sing Eng v. EsperdyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
3Cited by3 opinions
- Stefano Sovich v. P. A. Esperdy, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Tang v. District Director of the U. S. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1969
- Stefano Sovich v. P. A. Esperdy, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963