In the Matter of Tuakoi

35 Cited authorities

Heckler v. Community Health Services
467 U.S. 51 (1984) Cited 1,288 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a Medicare provider was responsible for familiarizing itself with the legal requirements of cost reimbursement and obtaining an agency interpretation of the applicable regulations
INS v. Chadha
462 U.S. 919 (1983) Cited 1,262 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that there was "adequate Art. III adverseness" because the executive branch determined that a federal statute was unconstitutional and refused to defend it but simultaneously continued to abide by it
Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Jong Ha Wang
450 U.S. 139 (1981) Cited 299 times
Holding that where allegations are "unsupported by affidavit" they cannot support a motion to reopen because this would constitute a circumvention of the affidavit requirement in the regulations
INS v. Miranda
459 U.S. 14 (1982) Cited 252 times
Holding that negligent conduct is an insufficient basis for an estoppel claim against the government
INS v. Rios-Pineda
471 U.S. 444 (1985) Cited 189 times
Holding that the BIA may discount evidence of seven years' presence in its assessment of eligibility for suspension when presence was maintained through meritless appeals
U.S. Philips Corp.
414 U.S. 5 (1973) Cited 202 times
Holding that estoppel did not toll the Act's statutory deadline
Pring v. Penthouse International, Ltd.
462 U.S. 1132 (1983) Cited 102 times
Overturning a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff where all witnesses testified that magazine story "could not possibly be about [the plaintiff] as she would not do [the acts alleged in the story]"
Keefe v. Massachusetts
465 U.S. 1068 (1984) Cited 97 times 1 Legal Analyses
Declining to find fundamental right to child-parent privilege where "[n]either Congress nor the Legislature of any State has seen fit to adopt a rule granting [such] a privilege . . ."
Moser v. United States
341 U.S. 41 (1951) Cited 150 times
Finding "misleading circumstances" the Court held that "elementary fairness" required estoppel
Montana v. Kennedy
366 U.S. 308 (1961) Cited 105 times
Holding that the government could not be estopped from denying the citizenship of a petitioner whose mother was prevented from returning to the United States before his birth by the incorrect advice of an immigration officer
Section 1101 - Definitions
8 U.S.C. § 1101 Cited 16,688 times 91 Legal Analyses
Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status
Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1182 Cited 9,900 times 69 Legal Analyses
Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"
Section 1251 - Transferred
8 U.S.C. § 1251 Cited 2,159 times 1 Legal Analyses
Delineating crimes that make alien deportable
Section 1254 - Repealed
8 U.S.C. § 1254 Cited 1,132 times 1 Legal Analyses
Describing suspension-of-deportation eligibility
Section 1258 - Change of nonimmigrant classification
8 U.S.C. § 1258 Cited 37 times
Referring to an "alien lawfully admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant"
Section 214.2 - Special requirements for admission, extension, and maintenance of status
8 C.F.R. § 214.2 Cited 462 times 44 Legal Analyses
Restating cap in 8 U.S.C. § 1184(g)(l)
Section 212.7 - Waiver of certain grounds of inadmissibility
8 C.F.R. § 212.7 Cited 150 times 1 Legal Analyses
Requiring payment
Section 208.11 - Comments from the Department of State
8 C.F.R. § 208.11 Cited 51 times
(a) U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may request, at its discretion, specific comments from the Department of State regarding individual cases or types of claims under consideration, or such other information as USCIS deems appropriate. (b) With respect to any asylum application, the Department of State may provide, at its discretion, to USCIS: (1) Detailed country conditions information relevant to eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal; (2) An assessment of the accuracy

In the Matter of Tuakoi

35 Cited authorities

Holding that a Medicare provider was responsible for familiarizing itself with the legal requirements of cost reimbursement and obtaining an agency interpretation of the applicable regulations

Holding that there was "adequate Art. III adverseness" because the executive branch determined that a federal statute was unconstitutional and refused to defend it but simultaneously continued to abide by it

Holding that where allegations are "unsupported by affidavit" they cannot support a motion to reopen because this would constitute a circumvention of the affidavit requirement in the regulations

Holding that negligent conduct is an insufficient basis for an estoppel claim against the government

Holding that the BIA may discount evidence of seven years' presence in its assessment of eligibility for suspension when presence was maintained through meritless appeals

Holding that estoppel did not toll the Act's statutory deadline

Overturning a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff where all witnesses testified that magazine story "could not possibly be about [the plaintiff] as she would not do [the acts alleged in the story]"

Declining to find fundamental right to child-parent privilege where "[n]either Congress nor the Legislature of any State has seen fit to adopt a rule granting [such] a privilege . . ."

Finding "misleading circumstances" the Court held that "elementary fairness" required estoppel

Holding that the government could not be estopped from denying the citizenship of a petitioner whose mother was prevented from returning to the United States before his birth by the incorrect advice of an immigration officer

Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status

Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

Delineating crimes that make alien deportable

Describing suspension-of-deportation eligibility

Referring to an "alien lawfully admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant"

Restating cap in 8 U.S.C. § 1184(g)(l)

Requiring payment