Petition of Briese

Citation267 F. 600
PartiesPetition of BRIESE.
Decision Date12 July 1920
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

Louis J. Castellano, of Brooklyn, N.Y., for petitioner.

Leroy W. Ross, U.S. Atty., of Brooklyn, N.Y., opposed.

CHATFIELD District Judge.

The applicant has been in the United States since 1891. He is 53 years old, and has four children born in the United States. He filed his first papers on March 28, 1917, in the Supreme Court of the state of New York, in the county of Kings. At that time he was living in Middle Village, Queens county, at No. 1487 Metropolitan avenue. This street begins in Brooklyn and runs for a considerable distance through Kings county before getting into the county of Queens. The clerk of Kings county, acting as clerk of the Supreme Court, allowed Briese to file his declaration of intention, stating that he lived at No. 1487 Metropolitan avenue. Apparently the clerk assumed that this was in Kings county, and Briese either did not know the difference or was ignorant of the requirement of the statute.

The law provides that any court of record of a state, 'having a seal, a clerk, and jurisdiction in actions at law or equity * * * in which the amount in controversy is unlimited,' shall have jurisdiction to naturalize aliens. The law then provides 'that the naturalization jurisdiction of all courts herein specified, state, territorial, and federal shall extend only to aliens resident within the respective judicial districts of such courts. ' Comp. St. Sec. 4351. Under section 4, par. 'First,' an alien must 'declare on oath before the clerk of any court authorized by this act to naturalize aliens, or his authorized deputy, in the district in which such alien resides. ' Comp. St. Sec. 4352.

The provisions of the Naturalization Law must be strictly and literally complied with in order to confer jurisdiction. Johannessen v. United States, 225 U.S. 227, 32 Sup.Ct. 613, 56 L.Ed. 1066; United States v. Ginsberg, 243 U.S. 472, 37 Sup.Ct. 422, 61 L.Ed. 853; United States v. Ness, 245 U.S. 319, 38 Sup.Ct. 118, 62 L.Ed. 321.

The declaration must state 'the present place of residence in the United States of said alien. ' This declaration has to remain on file at least two years. The declaration of the petitioner gave his residence as 1487 Metropolitan avenue. This was correct, but it added, 'Brooklyn, N.Y.,' which was incorrect. Nevertheless the petitioner did nothing for over two years and has now filed his application based upon this incorrect declaration. It has been held in the case of United States v.

Stoller (D.C.) 180 F. 910, that a petition filed in a district consisting of two counties in the state of Washington was valid in either county. The court there limited jurisdiction to the judicial district of that particular court.

The Supreme Court of the state of New York is an institution which has jurisdiction throughout the entire state, but this court is divided into departments and districts. The judges are elected from these districts. In each district there are several counties. The Supreme Court is held for each county and the county clerk of that county acts as clerk of the Supreme Court for that county. The seal of the county clerk is...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • In re Vasicek
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • March 12, 1921
    ... ... DYER, ... District Judge ... The ... candidate, Frantisek Vasicek, during the final hearing on his ... petition for naturalization, testified that he did not know ... the meaning of the words 'anarchy' or ... 'polygamy.' Thereupon the government prayed the ... Schurr (D.C.) 163 ... F. 648; United States v. Wayer (D.C.) 163 F. 650; ... United States v. Johnson (D.C.) 181 F. 429; Petition ... of Briese (D.C.) 267 F. 600 (see In re Pearlman ... (D.C.) 226 F. 60, for rule when application is filed in ... federal court)); that he is not a radical ... ...
  • United States v. Koopmans
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • May 14, 1923
    ...notice. The opinion I hold and have indicated herein is supported by authority as this question has heretofore been decided. Petition of Briese (D.C.) 267 F. 600; U.S. v. (U.S.D.C.S.D.N.Y., not reported, January 23, 1922), in which Judge Learned Hand wrote an opinion as follows: 'This suit ......
  • United States v. Olsen, 200-E.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • April 26, 1921
    ...may have been because of the adoption of the Judicial Code about that time, by which the Circuit Courts were abolished. In Petition of Briese (D.C.) 267 F. 600, the court refused naturalization because the declaration of intention was not filed in the court having jurisdiction over the peti......
  • United States v. Fox
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • May 12, 1926
    ...filed in the wrong jurisdiction is a nullity as far as conferring jurisdiction under the naturalization statute is concerned. Petition of Briese (D. C.) 267 F. 600; United States v. Koopmans (D. C.) 290 F. 545. My associate, Judge Campbell, in a learned opinion in United States v. Koopmans,......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT