In re Aprea

158 F. 702, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4969
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
DecidedFebruary 26, 1908
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 158 F. 702 (In re Aprea) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Aprea, 158 F. 702, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4969 (circtsdny 1908).

Opinion

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). Subdivision 2 of paragraph 2 of section 4 of the naturalization act of June 29, 1906 (34 Stat. 596, c. 3592 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p: 421]), provides as follows:

i‘The petition shall also be verified by the affidavits of at least two credible witnesses, who are citizens of the United States, and who shall state in their affidavits that they have personally known the applicant to be a resident of the United States for a period of at least five years continuously, and of the state, territory, or district in which the application is made for a period of at least one year immediately preceding the date of the filing of his petition, and that they each have personal knowledge that the petitioner is a person of good moral character, and that he is in every way qualified, in their opinion, to be admitted as a citizen of the United States.”

The petition in this case has not been verified in the manner prescribed by the statute, since the witness Ventri is not a citizen of the United States. It complies with the letter of the statute, so far as the witness Silvestri is concerned, since he did “state in [his] affidavit” that he had known the petitioner the requisite time. By admitting, however, that this statement was inaccurate, the witness has deprived his statement of any probative force, and it.would not be a fair compliance with the spirit of the statute to accept a petition thus verified as sufficient.'

The petition may be denied, without prejudice to a renewal on proper pápers. .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In re Vassall
47 F.2d 598 (Second Circuit, 1931)
Hunt v. Pearce
271 F. 498 (E.D. Oklahoma, 1921)
In re Vasicek
271 F. 326 (E.D. Missouri, 1921)
United States v. Gulliksen
244 F. 727 (Eighth Circuit, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
158 F. 702, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4969, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-aprea-circtsdny-1908.