Legal Opinion

United States ex rel. Deck v. Commissioner of Immigration & Naturalization

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 31, 1936PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAFFEY, District Judge.

1. The claim by the relator that he is the son of an American-born Chinese does not entitle him to a trial de novo by the court. United States ex rel. Jew Lee v. Brough (D.C.) 16 F.(2d) 492.

2. Within the narrow scope of review on habeas corpus of proceedings before the Labor Department, I think it clear, on the evidence, that there is no warrant for reversal of its_ decision. The executive officials are not bound by the ordinary rules of evidence prevailing in court trials of common-law actions. In a case where the controlling issue is the paternity of an applicant born…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tom Ung Chai v. BurnettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1928
  2. United States ex rel. Lee v. BroughDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1926

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States Ex Rel. Lapides v. WatkinsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
  2. United States Ex Rel. Jelic v. District Director of Immigration & Naturalization, Ellis IslandCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
  3. United States Ex Rel. Jelic v. District Director of Immigration & Naturalization, Ellis IslandCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
  4. United States ex rel. Lew Chung Jon v. Commissioner of ImmigrationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API