Mary Marie Agosto v. John P. Boyd, Etc.

Ninth Circuit

Mary Marie Agosto v. John P. Boyd, Etc.

443 F.2d 917, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9652

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 11, 1971

Docket24509

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 443 F.2d 917 (Mary Marie Agosto v. John P. Boyd, Etc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mary Marie Agosto v. John P. Boyd, Etc., 443 F.2d 917, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9652 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The wife and minor children of Vincent Pianetti (also known as Vincent Agosto) appeal from a judgment entered following an order of the district court dismissing their complaint in which appellants sought an order permitting them to intervene in deportation proceedings against Vincent pending before the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service. The court dismissed the complaint on the grounds of want of jurisdiction and of want of standing.

There is neither statutory nor decisional authority permitting district courts to entertain actions by the relatives of aliens to intervene in pending deportation proceedings. We decline to create such jurisdiction. We discover no basis for conferring standing upon the relatives of an alien to intervene in pending deportation proceedings. (See Swartz v. Rogers (1958) 103 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 254 F.2d 338, 339.)

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The wife and minor children of Vincent Pianetti (also known as Vincent Agosto) appeal from a judgment entered following an order of the district court dismissing their complaint in which appellants sought an order permitting them to intervene in deportation proceedings against Vincent pending before the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service. The court dismissed the complaint on the grounds of want of jurisdiction and of want of standing.

There is neither statutory nor decisional authority permitting district courts to entertain actions by the relatives of aliens to intervene in pending deportation proceedings. We decline to create such jurisdiction. We discover no basis for conferring standing upon the relatives of an alien to intervene in pending deportation proceedings. (See Swartz v. Rogers (1958) 103 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 254 F.2d 338, 339.)

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

443 F.2d 917, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mary-marie-agosto-v-john-p-boyd-etc-ca9-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack