10 Cited authorities
Klapprott v. United States
336 U.S. 942 (1949) Cited 1,272 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding a party may not seek relief under the Rule 60(b) catchall provision if the conduct, in fact, falls under Rule 60(b)
Luria v. United States
231 U.S. 9 (1913) Cited 200 timesIn Luria v. United States, 231 U.S. 9, 34 S.Ct. 10, 58 L.Ed. 101 (1913), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a predecessor statute that contained the rebuttable presumption now found in § 1451(d).
Bindczyck v. Finucane
342 U.S. 76 (1951) Cited 35 timesCERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. No. 18. Argued October 10, 1951. Decided November 26, 1951. 1. The procedure prescribed by § 338 of the Nationality Act of 1940, 8 U.S.C. § 738, is the exclusive procedure for revoking naturalization on the ground of fraud or illegal procurement, based on evidence outside the record. Pp. 77-88. 2. A state court granted petitioner a certificate of citizenship. At the same term, as permitted by state practice, it
Galpin v. Page
85 U.S. 350 (1873) Cited 209 timesIn Galpin v. Page, 9 Fed.Cas. 1126, 1132, 1133, No. 5,206, Mr. Circuit Justice Field elaborated upon this rule in the following language: "But when the judgment of such a court [of general jurisdiction] relates to a matter not falling within the general scope of its powers, and the authority of the court over the subject can only be exercised in a prescribed manner, not according to the course of the common law; * * * no such presumption of jurisdiction can arise.
Yamashita v. Hinkle
260 U.S. 199 (1922) Cited 6 timesIn Yamashita v. Hinkle, 260 U.S. 199 [ 67 L.Ed. 209, 43 Sup. Ct. Rep. 69], recently decided, certificates of naturalization were issued to two Japanese by the superior court of the state of Washington prior to 1906.
Garcia Laranjo v. Brownell
126 F. Supp. 370 (N.D. Cal. 1954) Cited 3 timesNo. 33900. November 10, 1954. As Amended November 30, 1954. Fallon Hargreaves, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff. Lloyd H. Burke, U.S. Atty., Charles Elmer Collett, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for defendant. OLIVER J. CARTER, District Judge. Plaintiff seeks a declaration under 8 U.S.C.A. § 1503 that she is a United States national, claiming a denial of her rights and privileges as a national because her application for a certificate of citizenship under Section 341 of the Immigration
Sanders v. Clark
85 F. Supp. 253 (E.D. Pa. 1949) Cited 1 timesCiv. A. No. 7744. August 9, 1949. T. Henry Walnut, Philadelphia, Pa., for the plaintiff. Gerald A. Gleeson, United States Attorney, James P. McCormick, Assistant United States Attorney, Philadelphia, Pa., for the defendants. Suit by Hans Hermann Sanders against Tom C. Clark, Attorney General of the United States, and others, to enjoin the defendants from prosecuting any proceeding for the removal or deportation of the plaintiff from the United States, or from otherwise interfering with him or molesting
Sanders v. Clark
76 F. Supp. 489 (E.D. Pa. 1948) Cited 2 timesCiv. A. No. 7744. March 10, 1948. T. Henry Walnut, of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff. Gerald A. Gleeson, U.S. Atty., of Philadelphia, Pa., for defendants. Action by Hans Hermann Sanders against Tom C. Clark and others for a declaratory judgment that plaintiff is a citizen of the United States. On motion to dismiss the complaint. Motion denied. McGRANERY, District Judge. This case is before the court on a motion to dismiss the complaint. Plaintiff is seeking a declaratory judgment as to his nationality
Anderson v. Anderson
11 N.E.2d 216 (Ill. App. Ct. 1937) Cited 9 timesIn Anderson v. Anderson, 292 Ill. App. 421, 426, 11 N.E.2d 216, 218, it is said: "The law contemplates and requires that every defendant be given the best possible notice of the pendency of a suit and it is only where personal service cannot be had that substituted service is permitted.
Section 1503 - Denial of rights and privileges as national
8 U.S.C. § 1503 Cited 562 timesConferring jurisdiction for such actions