Arbolino v. Shaughnessy, District Director Sessa v. Shaughnessy, District Director
This text of 204 F.2d 684 (Arbolino v. Shaughnessy, District Director Sessa v. Shaughnessy, District Director) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Since the defendants have no duty but to direct the plaintiff to report in Texas, and that is merely a transmission of the order of the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization in Washington, the action is within the decisions of the Supreme Court in Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512 [72 S.Ct. 410, 96 L.Ed. 534] and of this court in Reeber v. Rossel, 2 Cir., 200 F.2d 334. In Williams v. Fanning, 332 U.S. 490 [68 S.Ct. 188, 92 L.Ed. 95], the Postmaster was himself stopping the receipt of the magazine; an injunction against that was complete relief.
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
204 F.2d 684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arbolino-v-shaughnessy-district-director-sessa-v-shaughnessy-district-ca2-1953.