Tom We Shung v. Brownell, No. 11417.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia) |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 93 US App. DC 32,207 F.2d 132 |
| Docket Number | No. 11417. |
| Decision Date | 02 July 1953 |
| Parties | TOM WE SHUNG v. BROWNELL et al. |
93 US App. DC 32, 207 F.2d 132 (1953)
TOM WE SHUNG
v.
BROWNELL et al.
No. 11417.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued April 17, 1953.
Decided July 2, 1953.
Writ of Certiorari Granted October 19, 1953.
Judgment Vacated December 7, 1953.
Mr. Jack Wasserman, Washington, D. C., for appellant.
Mr. Lewis A. Carroll, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Charles M. Irelan, U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., at the time of argument, Ross O'Donoghue and William R. Glendon, Asst. U. S. Attys., Washington, D. C., at the time of argument, were on the brief, for appellees. Messrs. Leo A. Rover, U. S. Atty., and Joseph M. Howard, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., at time record was filed, and William E. Kirk, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., at time brief was filed, also entered appearances for appellees.
Before WILBUR K. MILLER, PROCTOR and FAHY, Circuit Judges.
Writ of Certiorari Granted October 19, 1953. See 74 S.Ct. 70.
Judgment Vacated December 7, 1953. See 74 S.Ct. 237.
PER CURIAM.
Tom We Shung, appellant, is an alien born in China. He sought entry into the United States under authority of Act of Dec. 28, 1945, c. 591, § 1, 59 Stat. 659, 8 U.S.C. § 232 (1946 ed.), U.S.Code Cong. Service 1945, p. 634,1 upon the claim that he was a minor child of one Tom Wing, an honorably discharged veteran of World War II with United States citizenship. Admission was denied Shung upon the ground, as determined by a Board of Special Inquiry, that he had failed to satisfactorily establish his alleged relationship
In the course of hearings before the three-member Board of Special Inquiry its personnel was changed between hearings by substitution of one Immigration Inspector for another, and by substitution of a secretary, or clerk-stenographer, in place of another of the same rank. However, the members making final determination were familiar with all the evidence and no objection was raised to the changes either at the hearings or at any stage of the administrative proceedings.
On this appeal appellant repeats contentions unsuccessfully urged in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alappat, In re, No. 92-1381
...Haven Co., 506 F.2d 1035, 1038 (2d Cir.1974) (party can abandon challenge to illegality of composition of NLRB); We Shung v. Brownell, 207 F.2d 132, 133 (D.C.Cir.) (party can abandon challenge to composition of immigration Board of Special Inquiry), vacated on other grounds, 346 U.S. 906, 7......
-
United States v. Murff
...243 (1946), 5 U.S.C.A. § 1009. 4 Tom We Shung v. McGrath, D.C.D.C. 1952, 103 F.Supp. 507. 5 Tom We Shung v. Brownell, D.C.Cir., 1953, 207 F.2d 132. 6 1953, 346 U.S. 906, 74 S.Ct. 237, 98 L. Ed. 405. The Court merely cited Heikkila v. Barber, 1953, 345 U.S. 229, 73 S.Ct. 603, 97 L.Ed. 972, a......
-
Evans v. Murff, Civ. No. 7826.
...before the Board of Immigration Appeals, and it is too late for him to raise it now. Tom We Shung v. Brownell, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 207 F.2d 132. The more difficult questions arise out of the attack on the refusal to grant discretionary relief. In the first place, there is serious doubt whet......
-
Brownell v. We Shung, No. 43
...order was valid. Tom We Shung v. Page 182 McGrath, D.C., 103 F.Supp. 507, affirmed sub nom. Tom We Shung v. Brownell, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 207 F.2d 132. We vacated the judgment and remanded the cause to the District Court with directions to dismiss it for lack of jurisdiction, 346 U.S. 906, ......
-
Alappat, In re, No. 92-1381
...Haven Co., 506 F.2d 1035, 1038 (2d Cir.1974) (party can abandon challenge to illegality of composition of NLRB); We Shung v. Brownell, 207 F.2d 132, 133 (D.C.Cir.) (party can abandon challenge to composition of immigration Board of Special Inquiry), vacated on other grounds, 346 U.S. 906, 7......
-
United States v. Murff
...243 (1946), 5 U.S.C.A. § 1009. 4 Tom We Shung v. McGrath, D.C.D.C. 1952, 103 F.Supp. 507. 5 Tom We Shung v. Brownell, D.C.Cir., 1953, 207 F.2d 132. 6 1953, 346 U.S. 906, 74 S.Ct. 237, 98 L. Ed. 405. The Court merely cited Heikkila v. Barber, 1953, 345 U.S. 229, 73 S.Ct. 603, 97 L.Ed. 972, a......
-
Evans v. Murff, Civ. No. 7826.
...before the Board of Immigration Appeals, and it is too late for him to raise it now. Tom We Shung v. Brownell, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 207 F.2d 132. The more difficult questions arise out of the attack on the refusal to grant discretionary relief. In the first place, there is serious doubt whet......
-
Brownell v. We Shung, No. 43
...order was valid. Tom We Shung v. Page 182 McGrath, D.C., 103 F.Supp. 507, affirmed sub nom. Tom We Shung v. Brownell, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 207 F.2d 132. We vacated the judgment and remanded the cause to the District Court with directions to dismiss it for lack of jurisdiction, 346 U.S. 906, ......