Lee v. MacOn Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 987 F.2d 1521 (11th Cir. 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
Lee v. MacOn Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 987 F.2d 1521 (11th Cir. 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
57 citation events (17 in the last 25 years) across 13 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Mercado-Zazueta v. Holder (ca9, 2009-09-08)
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993 2009 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 23 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mercado-Zazueta v. Holder (2×)
9th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
See Madrid-Tavarez v. INS, 999 F.2d 111, 112-13 (5th Cir.1993); Onwuneme v. INS, 67 F.3d 273 , 274 n. 1 (10th Cir.1995); Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1523-25 (11th Cir.1993); Anwo v. INS, 607 F.2d 435, 436-38 (D.C.Cir.1979).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mercado-Zazueta v. Holder
9th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
See Madrid-Tavarez v. INS, 999 F.2d 111, 112-13 (5th Cir. 1993); Onwuneme v. INS, 67 F.3d 273 , 274 n.1 (10th Cir. 1995); Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1523-25 (11th Cir. 1993); Anwo v. INS, 607 F.2d 435, 436-38 (D.C.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Escobar v. Holder (2×)
9th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
See Madrid-Tavarez v. INS, 999 F.2d 111, 112-13 (5th Cir.1993); Onwuneme v. INS, 67 F.3d 273 , 274 n. 1 (10th Cir.1995); Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1523-25 (11th Cir.1993); Anwo v. INS, 607 F.2d 435, 436-38 (D.C.Cir.1979).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Escobar v. Holder
9th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
See Madrid-Tavarez v. INS, 999 F.2d 111, 112-13 (5th Cir. 1993); Onwuneme v. INS, 67 F.3d 273 , 274 n.1 (10th Cir. 1995); Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1523-25 (11th Cir. 1993); Anwo v. INS, 607 F.2d 435, 436-38 (D.C.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jose Santos Loredo Mata v. U.S. Attorney General
11th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
“Lawful domicile” under former § 212(c) required “at least the simultaneous existence of lawful physical presence in the United States and lawful intent to remain in the United States indefinitely.” Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524 (11th Cir.1993) (emphasis added).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Yuexian Liu v. U.S. Attorney General (3×) also: Cited "see"
11th Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1526 (11th Cir.1993).
cited Cited as authority (rule) BLANCAS
BIA · 2002 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1525 (11th Cir. 1993); Matter of Ponce De Leon, 21 I&N Dec. 154, 158 (BIA 1996; A.G., BIA 1997).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kolster v. Ashcroft (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
D. Mass. · 2002 · confidence medium
This definition is consistent with the statute’s purpose of helping “aliens who are likely to have established strong ties to this country.” Id. (citing Melian v. Immigration and Naturalization Serv., 987 F.2d 1521, 1524 (11th Cir.1993)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Yesil v. Reno
S.D.N.Y. · 1997 · confidence medium
Castellon-Contreras, 45 F.3d at 153 ; Mellan v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524 (11th Cir.1993); Lok v. INS, 681 F.2d 107, 109-10 (2d Cir.1982).
examined Cited as authority (rule) PONCE DE LEON (3×) also: Cited "see"
BIA · 1996 · confidence medium
Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524-25 (11th Cir. 1993) (defining “lawful domicile” under section 212(c) without reference to permanent residence, as “at least the simultaneous existence of lawful physical presence in the United States and lawful intent to remain in the United States”); Brown v. INS, 856 F.2d 728 , 731 n.5 (5th Cir. 1988) (finding that intent to remain, and thus lawful domicile, might begin as of the date a nonimmigrant files an application for permanent residence). 8 A committee report cited by the Board in Matter of S-, supra, found that the pre-1952 law allowed the A…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) White v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
5th Cir. · 1996 · confidence medium
However, “[n]othing indicates that Congress intended to alter this ‘time-tested definition [of domicile] when it enacted § 212(c).’” Castellon-Contreras, 45 F.3d at 153 (quoting Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524 (11th Cir.1993)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Chidi Onwuneme v. Immigration and Naturalization, Service
10th Cir. · 1995 · confidence medium
Madrid-Tavarez. v. I.N.S., 999 F.2d 111, 112-13 (5th Cir.1993); Graham v. I.N.S., 998 F.2d 194, 195 (3d Cir.1993); Melian v. I.N.S., 987 F.2d 1521, 1524-25 (11th Cir.1993); Anwo v. I.N.S., 607 F.2d 435, 436-38 (D.C.Cir.1979). 2 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jorge E. Acosta-Montero v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
11th Cir. · 1995 · confidence medium
Sec. 1182 (c). 5 34 In conclusion, I respectfully dissent because the Board's interpretation of Sec. 212(c), holding that a final deportation order is a change of status terminating Petitioner's eligibility for Sec. 212(c) relief, is a reasonable one entitled to deference by this Court. * Honorable Frank A. Kaufman, Senior U.S. District Judge for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation 1 See, e.g., Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1523 (11th Cir.1993); Tapia-Acuna v. INS, 640 F.2d 223, 224 (9th Cir.1981); Francis v. INS, 532 F.2d 268, 272-73 (2d Cir.1976) 2 The subsections that specify t…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Orestes J. Asencio v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
11th Cir. · 1994 · confidence medium
Melian v. I.N.S., 987 F.2d 1521, 1526 (11th Cir.1993); Perlera-Escobar v. Executive Office for Immigration, 894 F.2d 1292, 1296 (11th Cir.1990).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Klenny Delourdes Umana v. Department of Justice Immigration and Naturalization Service
6th Cir. · 1994 · confidence medium
Graham v. INS, 998 F.2d 194, 195 (3d Cir.1993); Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1523 (11th Cir.1993).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jamshid Kamali v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
9th Cir. · 1994 · confidence medium
Fed.R.App.P. 34(a) and Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4 ** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 1 Courts that have considered broader definitions of "domicile" in the section 212(c) context have required both "lawful physical presence ... and lawful intent to remain in the United States indefinitely." Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524-25 (11th Cir.1993); see also Lok v. INS, 681 F.2d 107, 109-110 (2d Cir.1982)
cited Cited as authority (rule) Oswaldo Jaramillo v. Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Executive Office for Immigration Review
11th Cir. · 1993 · confidence medium
E.g., Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1523 (11th Cir.1993); Francis v. INS, 532 F.2d 268, 272-73 (2d Cir.1976).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lloyd Aston Graham v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
3rd Cir. · 1993 · confidence medium
Applying that reasoning to section 1182(c), the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that domicile means “at least the simultaneous existence of lawful physical presence in the United States and lawful intent to remain' in the United States indefinitely.” Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524 (11th Cir.1993).
discussed Cited "see" Gonzalez Ex Rel. Gonzalez v. Reno (2×)
S.D. Fla. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524 (11th Cir. 1993).
examined Cited "see" Benjamin Lepe-Guitron v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (4×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
9th Cir. · 1994 · signal: accord · confidence high
We adopted a definition of domicile consonant with its common law meaning: that “aliens must not only be physically present here, but must intend to remain.” Id. at 464; accord Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1524 (11th Cir.1993) (“ ‘lawful domicile’ under section 212(c) means at least the simultaneous existence of lawful physical presence in the United States and lawful intent to remain in the United States indefinitely”); Anwo v. INS, 607 F.2d 435, 437 (D.C.Cir.1979) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Vaka v. EMBRAER-EMPRESA BRASILEIRA DE AERONAUTICA
S.D. Fla. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See id.; see also Melian v. I.N.S., 987 F.2d 1521, 1525 (11th Cir.1993) (holding that the holder of a B-2 visa, which is issued to temporary visitors for business or pleasure, is not a U.S. domiciliary).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Eleazar Morel v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (2×)
3rd Cir. · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence medium
This excludes them as lawful “domiciliaries.” See Graham, 998 F.2d at 196 ; see also Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1525 (11th Cir.1993)(alien on temporary visitor visa cannot lawfully establish intent to remain since maintenance of foreign domicile required); Brown v. INS, 856 F.2d 728, 731 (5th Cir.1988)(alien on student visa cannot lawfully establish intent to remain since maintenance of foreign domicile required); Anwo v. INS, 607 F.2d 435, 437 (D.C.Cir.1979)(same).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Morel v. INS
3rd Cir. · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence medium
This excludes them as lawful "domiciliaries." See Graham, 998 F.2d at 196 ; see also Melian v. INS, 987 F.2d 1521, 1525 (11th Cir. 1993)(alien on temporary visitor visa cannot lawfully establish intent to remain since maintenance of foreign domicile required); Brown v. INS, 856 F.2d 728, 731 (5th Cir. 1988)(alien on student visa cannot lawfully establish intent to remain since maintenance of foreign domicile required); Anwo v. INS, 607 F.2d 435, 437 (D.C.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Anthony T. Lee, United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor and Amicus Curiae-Appellee, National Education Association, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee, Brandie McKee a Minor, by Thomas McKee Her Father and Next Friend Ishbah Cox, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees
v.
MacOn County Board of Education
91-7640.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Mar 5, 1993.
987 F.2d 1521
Published

987 F.2d 1521

81 Ed. Law Rep. 746

Anthony T. LEE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor and Amicus
Curiae-Appellee,
National Education Association, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee,
Brandie McKee, a minor, by Thomas McKee, her father and next
friend; Ishbah Cox, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees,
v.
MACON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 91-7640.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.

March 5, 1993.

Deborah H. Biggers, Tuskegee, AL, for defendants-appellants.

George L. Beck, Jr., Dennis R. Pierson, Montgomery, AL, for Brandie McKee, Thomas McKee, Ishbah Cox, Ruben Cox, Anderson, Redding and Save Our School Committee.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama; Robert E. Varner, Judge.

(Panel opinion August 18, 1992, 11th Cir., 1991, 970 F.2d 767)

Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, FAY, KRAVITCH, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK and CARNES, Circuit Judges.[*]

BY THE COURT:

A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on whether this case should be reheard by the Court sitting en banc, and a majority of the judges of this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel's opinion is hereby VACATED.

*

Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Thomas A. Clark has elected to participate in further proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(c)