Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, No. 276
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | CLARK, FRANK and MEDINA, Circuit |
| Citation | 213 F.2d 768 |
| Parties | PEDREIRO v. SHAUGHNESSY, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization. |
| Docket Number | No. 276,Docket 23091. |
| Decision Date | 01 July 1954 |
213 F.2d 768 (1954)
PEDREIRO
v.
SHAUGHNESSY, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization.
No. 276, Docket 23091.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued May 4, 1954.
Decided July 1, 1954.
Nemeroff, Jelline, Danzig & Paley, New York City (Aaron L. Danzig, New York City, of counsel), for petitioner-appellant.
J. Edward Lumbard, U. S. Atty. for the Southern Dist. of New York, New York City (Philip M. Drake, New Rochelle, N. Y., and Lester Friedman, New York City, of counsel), for respondent-appellee.
Before CLARK, FRANK and MEDINA, Circuit Judges.
MEDINA, Circuit Judge.
This is an action by a deportee for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief under the Administrative Procedure Act, § 10, 60 Stat. 243, 5 U.S.C.A. § 1009. Petitioner having exhausted his administrative remedies seeks a review of the proceedings resulting in a final order of deportation, claiming that his constitutional rights have been violated in that "the evidence adduced * * * was in contravention of * * * the Fifth Amendment in that your petitioner was deprived of due process of law and in that your petitioner was compelled to testify on matters which might tend to incriminate him, such as his entry into the United States and his purposes in coming to the United States."
The merits have not been considered, the court below having dismissed the case on motion pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., as the action was brought against the District Director of Immigration and Naturalization for the District of New York, without joining either the Attorney General or the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization.
To those who have spent the greater part of their professional lives manipulating procedural devices in the ebb and
The aliens involved in deportation proceedings are often in poor financial circumstances; the validity of final orders of deportation generally, if not always, depends upon questions relating to the alleged infringement of the deportees' constitutional rights; their imprisonment or enlargement on bail and the actual deportation itself affect human relationships of the highest consequence. Under these circumstances it would seem that the courts must be able to spell out some simple formula, which will cut through red tape, face realities, and provide an expeditious and inexpensive remedy, with a minimum amount of procedural frills and a maximum amount of attention to the question of whether or not the administrative proceedings against the deportee have conformed to the requirements of due process.
And yet a careful perusal of the numerous decided cases referred to in Judge Dimock's scholarly and reasoned opinion, and certain other authorities cited in the briefs submitted by counsel for the parties, discloses refinements and conflicting views which make it a difficult task to find and apply controlling principles. The traditional remedy of habeas corpus as a means of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lam Man Chi v. Bouchard, No. 13938.
...130 (1961); and Chao-Ling Wang v. Pilliod, 285 F.2d 517 (7 Cir., 1960), reflect this two-step practice. See also Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 213 F.2d 768 (2d Cir., 1954), aff'd 349 U.S. 48, 75 S.Ct. 591, 99 L.Ed. 868 The proceedings in Yu's case were typical.4 On December 2, 1959, a hearing wa......
-
Walters v. Ashcroft, No. 02-CIV-9577 (KMW).
...at 2-3 (citing Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 121 S.Ct. 2491, 150 L.Ed.2d 653 (2001)). 9. The Government cites Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 213 F.2d 768 (2d Cir.1954), for the proposition that the INS District Director is the only proper respondent in a habeas petition. However, Pedreiro simp......
-
Estrada v. Ahrens, No. 18633.
...administrative proceedings against the deportee have conformed to the requirements of due process". Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 2 Cir., 1954, 213 F.2d 768, The court found that under the applicable regulations the district director was responsible for the deportation proceedings and that the c......
-
Evans v. Murff, Civ. No. 7826.
...9 Cir., 226 F.2d 449. De Pinho Vaz v. Shaughnessy was distinguished, not overruled, by the Second Circuit in Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 213 F.2d 768; the possible distinction was not discussed by the Supreme Court on appeal, 349 U.S. 48, 75 S.Ct. 591. Much of the reasoning of the Supreme Cour......
-
Lam Man Chi v. Bouchard, No. 13938.
...130 (1961); and Chao-Ling Wang v. Pilliod, 285 F.2d 517 (7 Cir., 1960), reflect this two-step practice. See also Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 213 F.2d 768 (2d Cir., 1954), aff'd 349 U.S. 48, 75 S.Ct. 591, 99 L.Ed. 868 The proceedings in Yu's case were typical.4 On December 2, 1959, a hearing wa......
-
Walters v. Ashcroft, No. 02-CIV-9577 (KMW).
...at 2-3 (citing Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 121 S.Ct. 2491, 150 L.Ed.2d 653 (2001)). 9. The Government cites Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 213 F.2d 768 (2d Cir.1954), for the proposition that the INS District Director is the only proper respondent in a habeas petition. However, Pedreiro simp......
-
Estrada v. Ahrens, No. 18633.
...administrative proceedings against the deportee have conformed to the requirements of due process". Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 2 Cir., 1954, 213 F.2d 768, The court found that under the applicable regulations the district director was responsible for the deportation proceedings and that the c......
-
Evans v. Murff, Civ. No. 7826.
...9 Cir., 226 F.2d 449. De Pinho Vaz v. Shaughnessy was distinguished, not overruled, by the Second Circuit in Pedreiro v. Shaughnessy, 213 F.2d 768; the possible distinction was not discussed by the Supreme Court on appeal, 349 U.S. 48, 75 S.Ct. 591. Much of the reasoning of the Supreme Cour......