Wah v. United States

163 F. 1008, 90 C.C.A. 178, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4598
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedJune 3, 1908
DocketNo. 268
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 163 F. 1008 (Wah v. United States) 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
Wah v. United States, 163 F. 1008, 90 C.C.A. 178, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4598 (2d Cir. 1908).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The question involved may be stated briefly as follows: Can a Chinese person, against whom deportation proceed[1009]*1009ings are pending, be called as a witness by the United States and compelled to answer questions relevant to the pending issue? That this question must be answered in the affirmative is sustained by a decided preponderance of authority.

The District Judge has stated the facts and has cited the principal authorities establishing the right and power of the District Court to punish for contempt a witness who refuses to answer in circumstances similar to those shown by this record. Since the decision of the Supreme Court, followed by the Circuit Court of Appeals of several of the circuits, that the proceeding to deport is civil, and not criminal, in its nature, the principal argument for sustaining the refusal to answer has been removed. We deem it unnecessary to add to the discussion found in the opinion below.

The order is affirmed.

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

Related

Rothman v. Campbell
54 F.2d 103 (S.D. New York, 1930)
United States v. Harbin
27 F.2d 892 (N.D. Mississippi, 1928)
United States Ex Rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod
263 U.S. 149 (Supreme Court, 1923)
United States ex rel. Rennie v. Brooks
284 F. 908 (E.D. Michigan, 1922)
In re Chan Foo Lin
243 F. 137 (Sixth Circuit, 1917)
United States v. Jones
230 F. 262 (N.D. New York, 1916)
Karel v. Conlan
144 N.W. 266 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1913)
In re Automatic Musical Co.
204 F. 334 (N.D. New York, 1913)
In re Umeno
3 D. Haw. 481 (D. Hawaii, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 F. 1008, 90 C.C.A. 178, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wah-v-united-states-ca2-1908.