From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scalzo v. Hurney

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Mar 1, 1963
314 F.2d 675 (3d Cir. 1963)

Opinion

No. 14034.

Argued February 4, 1963.

Decided March 1, 1963.

Rudolph J. DiMassa, Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner.

Joseph R. Ritchie, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., for respondent.

Before KALODNER, STALEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.


Petitioner was ordered deported by the Board of Immigration Appeals. She then filed suit to review that order in the district court, the complaint averring that the Board wrongfully refused to adjust her status to that of a permanent resident under § 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1255. The case was ordered transferred to this court pursuant to the recent amendment providing, with certain exceptions not here relevant, for exclusive review of all final orders of deportation in the circuit courts of appeals. 8 U.S.C.A. § 1105a.

An analysis of the petition makes it abundantly clear that petitioner challenges the order of deportation only insofar as she seeks review of the Board's refusal to adjust her status. In the light of our recent opinion in Lam Man Chi et al. v. Bouchard, 314 F.2d 664 (C.A.3, 1963), that determination is collateral to the order of deportation and is not initially reviewable here. Hence, we are without jurisdiction and the case will be remanded to the district court.


Summaries of

Scalzo v. Hurney

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Mar 1, 1963
314 F.2d 675 (3d Cir. 1963)
Case details for

Scalzo v. Hurney

Case Details

Full title:Candida SCALZO, Appellant, v. L.W. HURNEY, as District Director of the…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Mar 1, 1963

Citations

314 F.2d 675 (3d Cir. 1963)

Citing Cases

Talavera v. Pederson

The respondent agrees with the petitioner that jurisdiction exists, but concedes that by reason of the…

Nippon Express U.S.A., Inc. v. Esperdy

The Court of Appeals for the Third and Fifth Circuits have held to the contrary. Scalzo v. Hurney, 314 F.2d…