Et Min Ng v. Herbert Brownell, Jr., Attorney General of the United States

Et Min Ng brought this action against the Attorney General of the United States for a judgment declaring plaintiff to be a national of this country. 1 After a trial without a jury, judgment was entered for defendant. Appealing from that judgment, plaintiff specifies as error the admission of evidence pertaining to a certain blood-grouping test. He also contends that certain findings of fact are clearly erroneous.

Appellant, who was born in China in 1933, arrived at Honolulu on May 15, 1952, and requested admission as a United States citizen. He claimed citizenship by reason of being the asserted son of Hung Way Ng, who, it was claimed, was a citizen of the United States. A board of special inquiry of the Immigration and Naturalization Service determined, after hearing, that this claim was well-founded. That board accordingly, on June 4, 1952, entered an order admitting Et Min Ng as a citizen of the United States.

On May 28, 1953, proceeding under § 341 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1452 , appellant applied for a certificate of citizenship. The Immigration and Naturalization Service rejected the application, holding that Et Min Ng was not the son of Hung…

(concurring).

I concur in the reasoning of the court that appellant plaintiff failed to maintain his burden of proof. It is further supported by the testimony of the disinterested witness Ching that he read to both the father and the son the document containing their agreement to allow their blood tests and explained it to them before they signed it. This fully supports the Court’s finding V stating:

On appeal it must he presumed that the Court accepted this evidence and disbelieved their inconsistent testimony to the contrary. No more seems needed to dispose of their long delayed contention that they were coerced.

This conclusion and that concerning the abuse of the right of privacy is further supported by the reasoning of the recent opinion of the Supreme Court in Breithaupt v. Abram, 352 U.S. 432 , 77 S.Ct. 408 , 1 L.Ed.2d 448 , holding that the taking of a blood test without the consent of the person subject to a qualified physician’s hypodermic withdrawal of the blood, is not violative of any constitutional right.

258 F.2d 304 ET MIN NG, Appellant, v. Herbert BROWNELL, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, Appellee. No. 15767. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. August 5, 1958. N. W. Y. Char, Honolulu, Hawaii, Wm. J. Gintjee, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant. Louis B. Blissard, U. S. Atty., Charles B. Dwight, III, Asst. U. S. Atty., Honolulu, Hawaii, for appellee. Before STEPHENS, Chief Judge, and DENMAN and HAMLEY, Circuit Judges. HAMLEY, Circuit Judge. 1 Et Min Ng brought this action against the Attorney General of the United States for a judgment declaring plaintiff to be a national of this country. 1 After a trial without a jury, judgment was entered for defendant. Appealing from that judgment, plaintiff specifies as error the admission of evidence pertaining to a certain blood-grouping test. He also contends that certain findings of fact are clearly erroneous. 2 Appellant, who was born in China in 1933, arrived at Honolulu on May 15, 1952, and requested admission as a United States citizen. He claimed citizenship by reason of being the asserted son of Hung Way Ng, who, it was claimed, was a citizen of the United States. A board of special inquiry of the Immigration…