Nagle

Lui Tse Chew v. Nagle

Good Law
15 F.2d 636·1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2960
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 1926No. 4836California816 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

The appellant appeals from the order of the court below denying his petition for habeas corpus. He is a Chinese person, and he arrived at the port of San Francisco, accompanied by his alleged father, Lui Yee Yun, a domiciled Chinese merchant, and by his alleged younger brother Lui Tee Foon. The board of special inquiry found against the relationship of both said alleged sons to Lui Yee Yun. On appeal the board of review held that Lui Tee Foon was entitled to admission as the son of Lui Yee Yun, but affirmed the order excluding the appellant,

It is alleged in the petition for the writ that the evidence of the relationship between the appellant and his alleged father was so convincing and conclusive that it was abuse of discretion and illegal to exclude him. We find no ground for so holding. The discrepancies between the testimony of the appellant and that of his alleged father and his alleged brother and that of Lui Tse Som, a previously landed son of Lui Yee Yun, were sufficient to justify the order of exclusion. There was a notable discrepancy in the testimony concerning the annual flooding of the home village. The prior landed alleged brother testified that the village was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.