Arbolino v. Shaughnessy, District Director Sessa v. Shaughnessy, District Director

204 F.2d 684
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedFebruary 13, 1953
Docket684_1
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
Arbolino v. Shaughnessy, District Director Sessa v. Shaughnessy, District Director, 204 F.2d 684 (2d Cir. 1953).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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

Williams v. Fanning
332 U.S. 490 (Supreme Court, 1947)
Blackmar v. Guerre
342 U.S. 512 (Supreme Court, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
204 F.2d 684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arbolino-v-shaughnessy-district-director-sessa-v-shaughnessy-district-ca2-1953.