red
Negative treatment
-2.7 score
Cite instead
Treatment trajectory · 1967 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1967
1996
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Vacated
Siu Fung Luk v. George K. Rosenberg, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service of the United States Department of Justice
(3×)
The judgment in Stellas was vacated by the Supreme Court and remanded with instructions that it be returned to the Service, at the suggestion of the Service itself. 388 U.S. 462 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1322 (1967).
examined
Vacated
United States Ex Rel. Tomislav Kordic and Venka Kordic v. P. A. Esperdy, as District Director of the Immigration and Naturalizationservice
(3×)
The anxiin Stellas was vacated by the Supreme Court and remanded with instructions that it be returned to the Service for further hearings. 388 U.S. 462 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1322 (1967).
examined
Cited "see"
Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States
(3×)
See Stellas v. Esperdy, 366 F.2d 266, 269 (2nd Cir.1966), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 388 U.S. 462 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1322 (1967) (“[T]he Attorney General may govern the exercise of his discretion by written or unwritten rules; indeed it would be remarkable if he did not.
examined
Cited "see"
Spencer Enterprises, Inc. Li-Hui Chang, and Chung-Chuan Sun Jerry Chien-Hua Raan Ping Fu Lu v. United States of America United States Department of Justice Immigration and Naturalization Service
(3×)
See Stellas v. Esperdy, 366 F.2d 266 , 269 (2nd Cir.1966), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 388 U.S. 462 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1322 (1967) ("[T]he Attorney General may govern the exercise of his discretion by written or unwritten rules; indeed it would be remarkable if he did not.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert Brutzman
See Earl v. United States, 361 F.2d 531 , 534 n. 1 (D.C.Cir.1966), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967) (dictum).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Sanchez
See Earl v. United States, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 77 , 80, 361 F.2d 531, 534 (1966), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967); United States v. Bautista, 509 F.2d 675, 677 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Villines
See Earl v. United States, 361 F.2d 531, 533 (D.C.Cir.1966), ce rt. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
James H. Ellis, Jr. v. United States of America, Alfred M. Watkins v. United States
(2×)
See Earl v. United States, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 77 , 80, 361 F.2d 531, 534 (1966), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967); 10 In re Bart, 113 U.S.App.D.C. 54 , 304 F.2d 631 (1962) (by implication).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Monroe
See, e.g., Earl v. United States, 361 F.2d 531, 534-35 (D.C.Cir.1966), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967); United States v. Angiulo, 897 F.2d 1169 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 845 , 111 S.Ct. 130 , 112 L.Ed.2d 98 (1990); United States v. Turkish, 623 F.2d 769, 775-77 (2d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1077 , 101 S.Ct. 856 , 66 L.Ed.2d 800 (1981); United States v. Tindle, 808 F.2d 319, 325 n. 4 (4th Cir.1986); United States v. Thevis, 665 F.2d 616, 639 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 1008 , 102 S.Ct. 2300 , 73 L.Ed.2d 1303 (1982); United States v. Pe…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Henning Heldt and Duke Snider, United States of America v. Mary Sue Hubbard, United States of America v. Sharon Thomas, United States of America v. Gregory Willardson, United States of America v. Richard Weigand, United States of America v. Cindy Raymond, United States of America v. Gerald Bennett Wolfe, United States of America v. Mitchell Hermann
United States v. Herman, 589 F.2d 1191 (3d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 913 , 99 S.Ct. 2014 , 60 L.Ed.2d 386 (1979); United States v. Morrison, 535 F.2d 223 (3d Cir. 1976); cf. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Smith, 615 F.2d 964 (3d Cir. 1980) (distinguishing statutory and "judicial" immunity); see also Earl v. United States, 361 F.2d 531 , 534 n.1 (D.C.Cir.1966), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Heldt
United States v. Herman, 589 F.2d 1191 (3d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 913 , 99 S.Ct. 2014 , 60 L.Ed.2d 386 (1979); United States v. Morrison, 535 F.2d 223 (3d Cir. 1976); cf. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Smith, 615 F.2d 964 (3d Cir. 1980) (distinguishing statutory and “judicial” immunity); see also Earl v. United States, 361 F.2d 531 , 534 n.1 (D.C.Cir.1966), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Samuel D. Wright
Compare, e. g., United States v. Morrison, 535 F.2d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 1976) (inununity required because of prosecutorial misconduct), and Earl v. United States, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 77 , 80 n. 1, 361 F.2d *36 531, 534 n. 1 (1966) (immunity might be required if government granted it to its own witness), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 921 , 87 S.Ct. 2121 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1370 (1967), with United States v. Ramsey, 503 F.2d 524, 532 (7th Cir. 1974) (“no merit to the argument” that defendant has constitutional right to immunity for his witness), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 932 , 95 S.Ct. 1136 , 43 L.Ed.2d 405 (1975…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Stellas
v.
Esperdy, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service
v.
Esperdy, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service
934, Misc.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 12, 1967.
Anna Mamalakis Pappas and Omar Z. Ghobashy for petitioner., Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for respondent.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 59 opinions | Published
Per Curiam.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York with directions that it be returned to the Immigration and Naturalization Service for further administrative proceedings.