In re Findan
| Decision Date | 25 July 1933 |
| Citation | 4 F. Supp. 189 |
| Parties | In re FINDAN (Naturalization No. 31560). |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island |
Henry Nicolls, District Director of Naturalization, of Boston, Mass., for the United States.
Aram A. Arabian and George K. Demopulos, both of Providence, R. I., for John and Costa Koufoudakis.
There is before the court the petition for naturalization of Maria Findan, a native of Glasgow. The petition was regularly filed and contains the usual and sufficient allegations as to eligibility for citizenship.
To the granting of this petition, the government has interposed objection on the ground that the two persons presented as witnesses are not citizens of the United States, as required by the statute. It is conceded that the petitioner has met all other requirements and may be properly granted citizenship, provided the two witnesses, John Koufoudakis and Costa Koufoudakis are themselves citizens. The facts relating to their status are as follows:
Stelios Koufoudakis, father of John and Costa, while unmarried, was naturalized in New York City on February 6, 1893. Thereafter, and within five years of his naturalization, in the course of his occupation or employment, he went abroad and did not again return to the United States. The record does not disclose the country to which his occupation, upon leaving the United States, first took him. It does, however, disclose that after leaving the United States he married. From that marriage were born two children in Smyrna, Asia Minor; John in 1900, and Costa in 1903. Both sons, before attaining the age of eighteen, were taken by their parent before the United States Consul at Smyrna and registered as children of a citizen of the United States. Both obtained identification certificates and took the oath of allegiance to the United States.
In December, 1919, John obtained an American passport and came to the United States, where he has since continuously resided. Since attaining his majority on January 5, 1921, he has exercised his franchise as a citizen by voting in this country and has on several occasions served, without challenge, as a witness on other petitions for naturalization.
Costa came to the United States on an American passport in January, 1921, and has since continuously resided here. He, too, has exercised all the privileges of citizenship, both by voting and appearing as a witness in proceedings necessitating a recognition and acceptance of his status as a citizen.
On January 27, 1930, upon a petition filed by the United States, the earlier decree admitting the father, Stelios Koufoudakis, to citizenship was set aside by the entry of a pro confesso decree. It appears that no personal service of the petition, leading to the entry of this decree, was ever made upon the father. The statutory requirements of substituted service were, however, fulfilled. No notice of any kind of the pendency of the petition, affecting the citizenship status of the father, was ever had by John or Costa. Shortly after the entry of the decree of cancellation, to wit, on March 5, 1930, the father, while...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rosasco v. Brownell
...D.C.S.D.Ill.1955, 133 F.Supp. 201, cited by the defendant, and In re Bolter, D.C. S.D.Cal.1946, 66 F.Supp. 566, and In re Findan, D.C.D.R.I.1933, 4 F.Supp. 189, cited by the plaintiffs, are all cases involving the effect of a judgment cancelling a parent's citizenship upon the rights of nat......
-
Sanders v. Clark
...naturalization, no rights could be derived by his wife or child. Cf. Rosenberg v. United States, 3 Cir., 60 F.2d 475; see In re Findan, D.C., 4 F.Supp. 189, 190. This derivative reasoning received Congressional sanction in the Nationality Act of 1940, 8 U.S.C.A. § 501 et seq. Cf. United Sta......
-
Battaglino v. Marshall
...because of the cancellation of his father's certificate as above noted. Some support is to be found for the decision below. In re Findan, D.C., 4 F. Supp. 189; In re Bolter, D.C., 66 F.Supp. 566. But we think it is erroneous and that the error apparently is due to the fact that the required......
-
In re Bolter, 109666.
...307 U.S. 325, 329, 344, 59 S.Ct. 884, 83 L.Ed. 1320; Haaland v. Attorney General, D.C.Md., 1941, 42 F. Supp. 13, 21; In re Findan, D.C.R.I., 1933, 4 F.Supp. 189-190. To paraphrase the language of Perkins v. Elg, supra, 307 U.S. 325 at page 329, 59 S.Ct. 884, 83 L.Ed. 1320: As at birth Jack ......