12 Cited authorities
Moser v. United States
341 U.S. 41 (1951) Cited 150 timesFinding "misleading circumstances" the Court held that "elementary fairness" required estoppel
McLeod v. Peterson
283 F.2d 180 (3d Cir. 1960) Cited 24 timesFinding a gross miscarriage of justice where the "error was so obvious and so clear that counsel should have been quick to appeal"
Wiser v. Lawler
189 U.S. 260 (1903) Cited 48 timesIn Wiser v. Lawler, 189 U.S. 260, 23 S.Ct. 624, 47 L.Ed. 802 (1903), the Court, on appeal from the Supreme Court of the then Territory of Arizona, held that promoters of mining enterprises, in the preparation of prospectuses, were bound to consider the effect that would be produced upon an ordinary mind by the representations of the prospectuses.
Tejeda v. U.S. Immigration Nat. Serv
346 F.2d 389 (9th Cir. 1965) Cited 15 timesNo. 18999. May 19, 1965. William C. Wunsch, Faulkner, Sheehan Wiseman, Norman Stiller, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner. Cecil F. Poole, U.S. Atty., Charles Elmer Collett, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for respondent. Before POPE and BARNES, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON, District Judge. BARNES, Circuit Judge: This is a petition to review a final order of deportation. Jurisdiction lies with this court under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a and 5 U.S.C. § 1031-1042; Foti v. Immigration and Naturalization
Patsis v. Immigration Naturalization Service
337 F.2d 733 (8th Cir. 1964) Cited 8 timesNo. 17316. October 29, 1964. Albert J. Yonke, Kansas City, Mo., made argument for petitioner and filed brief. Don Bennett, Atty., Immigration Naturalization Dept., Washington, D.C., made argument for respondent and filed brief with Kenneth C. Shelver, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C. and Richard D. FitzGibbon, U.S. Atty., and Grove G. Sweet, Asst. U.S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo. Before VOGEL, MATTHES and BLACKMUN, Circuit Judges. BLACKMUN, Circuit Judge. Athanasios Patsis petitions for review
Fassilis v. Esperdy
301 F.2d 429 (2d Cir. 1962) Cited 8 timesIn Fassilis, the court held that a statutory change making alien crewman — as opposed to other aliens — ineligible for adjustment of status applied to alien crewmen whose applications were pending on the date of enactment.
Foti v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
332 F.2d 424 (2d Cir. 1964) Cited 6 timesNo. 482, Docket 27345. Argued May 14, 1964. Decided May 26, 1964. James J. Cally, of Cally Cally, New York City, for petitioner. Roy Babitt, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty. (Robert M. Morgenthau, U.S. Atty., on the brief), for respondent. Before KAUFMAN, HAYS and MARSHALL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The petitioner, who concedes that he is deportable, applied to the Attorney General for suspension of deportation on the ground of hardship. He seeks review here of the order of the Attorney General denying his
Application of Martini
184 F. Supp. 395 (S.D.N.Y. 1960) Cited 9 timesHolding that naturalization and removal are entirely different matters, and that “[p]resence in the United States, lawful or unlawful, does not affect the right to naturalization”
Cole v. Railroad Retirement Board
289 F.2d 65 (8th Cir. 1961) Cited 6 timesNo. 16588. April 25, 1961. John J. Cole, St. Louis, Mo., Henegan, Roberts Cole and Woodward L. Carter, Jr., St. Louis, Mo., on the brief, for petitioner. Louis Turner, Asst. General Counsel, Chicago, Ill., Myles F. Gibbons, David B. Schreiber and Ernest O. Eisenberg, Railroad Retirement Board, Chicago, Ill., on the brief, for respondent. Before SANBORN, VAN OOSTERHOUT and MATTHES, Circuit Judges. SANBORN, Circuit Judge. This is a petition to review and set aside a decision of the Railroad Retirement
Section 1251 - Transferred
8 U.S.C. § 1251 Cited 2,158 times 1 Legal AnalysesDelineating crimes that make alien deportable