Nagle

Louie Poy Hok v. Nagle

Good Law
48 F.2d 753·1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4293
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 6, 1931No. 6349California2,336 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sawtelle, J.

Petitioner, Louie Fung Leung, has twice made application for admission into the United States on the ground that he is a minor blood son of Louie Poy Hok, a person of Chinese descent, whose status as a resident merchant is conceded. Appellant first applied for admission December 1, 1927. His application was denied by a Board of Special Inquiry and by the Department of Labor on appeal, and a writ of habeas corpus, refused by the District Court for the Southern Division of the Northern District of California, whereupon petitioner was deported: to China. He again sought admission on April 1, 1930, and presented as additional witnesses Louie Doo Yin, who has twice visited his home in China, and Louie Fung On, an alleged brother, who was admitted as the son of Louie Poy Hok in 1920. The Special Board of Inquiry made the following finding: “In view of the fact that no new evidence has been introduced by any of the principals in this ease I cannot see that the present situation has in any way been changed from the one that existed in.Deeember, 1927.”

This finding was affirmed by the Department of Labor on appeal. On June 26, 1930, a petition for writ of habeas corpus was again applied…

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.