Lincoln Roy Buckley & Everlast-Saw & Carbide Tools, Inc. v. Thomas C. Gibney, Deputy Dist. Dir. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. for the Dist. of New York, Everlast-Saw & Carbide Tools, Inc., & Lincoln Roy Buckley v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 449 F.2d 1305 (2d Cir. 1971). · Go Syfert
Search
Lincoln Roy Buckley & Everlast-Saw & Carbide Tools, Inc. v. Thomas C. Gibney, Deputy Dist. Dir. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. for the Dist. of New York, Everlast-Saw & Carbide Tools, Inc., & Lincoln Roy Buckley v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 449 F.2d 1305 (2d Cir. 1971). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events across 10 distinct courts.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lincoln Roy Buckley and Everlast-Saw and Carbide Tools, Inc.
v.
Thomas C. Gibney, Deputy District Director Immigration and Naturalization Service for the District of New York, Everlast-Saw and Carbide Tools, Inc., and Lincoln Roy Buckley v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
148_1.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Sep 17, 1971.
449 F.2d 1305
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

449 F.2d 1305

Lincoln Roy BUCKLEY and Everlast-Saw and Carbide Tools,
Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Thomas C. GIBNEY, Deputy District Director Immigration and
Naturalization Service for the District of New
York, Defendant-Appellee.
EVERLAST-SAW AND CARBIDE TOOLS, INC., and Lincoln Roy
Buckley, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee.

Nos. 147, 148, Dockets 71-1342, 71-1666.

United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.

Argued Sept. 17, 1971.
Decided Sept. 17, 1971.

Charles A. Giulini, Jr., Brooklyn, N. Y., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Joseph P. Marro, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., New York City (Whitney North Seymour, Jr., U. S. Atty. for Southern District of New York, Stanley H. Wallenstein, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., New York City, of counsel), for defendants-appellees.

Before KAUFMAN, ANDERSON and FEINBERG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The order of Judge Wyatt is affirmed on the basis of his opinion below, 332 F.Supp. 790, and the order of Judge Croake is affirmed on the basis of his memorandum below.