Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Everett Flint DAMON, ex rel. FONG HANG LEONG, Petitioner, Appellant, v. John P. JOHNSON, U. S. Commissioner of Immigration, Respondent, Appellee, 1925 — 4 F.2d 1016 · caselaw · US
General
Everett Flint DAMON, ex rel. FONG HANG LEONG, Petitioner, Appellant, v. John P. JOHNSON, U. S. Commissioner of Immigration, Respondent, Appellee
4 F.2d 1016·United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·1925
Before BINGHAM, JOHNSON, and ANDERSON, JJ.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Everett Flint DAMON, ex rel. FONG HANG LEONG, Petitioner, Appellant, v. John P. JOHNSON, U. S. Commissioner of Immigration, Respondent, Appellee.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
February 17, 1925.)
No. 1799.
Appeal from the district court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts; James Arnold Lowell, Judge.
Everett Flint Damon, of Boston, Mass., for appellant. Robert O. Harris, U. S. Atty., and John W. Schenck, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Boston, Mass. (Harold P. Williams, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for appellee.
Before BINGHAM, JOHNSON, and ANDERSON, JJ.
[MAJORITY — ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.]
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.
Fong Hang Leong claims to be the foreign-born son of Fong Ging and that Fong Ging is an American citizen. The immigration officials held against both contentions — that Fong Ging was not proved to be of American birth, and that the applicant (a man 38 years old, with three or four children) was not proved to be Fong Ging’s son. On petition for habeas corpus the District Court said: “The immigration authorities gave careful attention to this case, and decided on evidence ‘ which might, well have satisfied a court of justice that the father of the appellant was not an American citizen. Under these circumstances I can find no ground for the allegation in the petition that a fair hearing was not granted. Writ refused.” As the District Court found all jurisdictional facts in the respondent’s favor, no appeal to this court lies. The case is on all fours with 1723, Chin Wey v. Wixon, 4 F.(2d) 247, decided this day. It must be transferred to the Supreme Court under Act of September 14, 1922. Judicial Code, § 238a (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 1215a). It is so ordered.