Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Moskun v. United States

143 F.2d 129

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1944-06-05
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. Nicholas Joseph Moskun, an alien, has appealed from an order of the District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan denying his petition for naturalization. His admission to citizenship was steadfastly and vigorously opposed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice. Upon conclusion of the hearing of testimony on April 12, 1943, the district court- directed the preparation of a decree denying the petition, but subsequently granted a rehearing. This rehearing was had on May 17, -1943, when further evidence was received.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Moskun v. United States. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
8 opinions
MOSKUN v. UNITED STATES,143 F.2d 129(6th Cir. 1944)
MOSKUN v. UNITED STATES.
No. 9654.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
June 5, 1944.
Page 130
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan; Edward J. Moinet, Judge.

Petition by Nicholas Joseph Moskun against the United States for naturalization. The petition was denied and petitioner appeals.

Reversed and remanded with directions.
Daniel P. O'Brien, of Detroit, Mich. (Daniel P. O'Brien and Morton A. Eden, both of Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for appellant.

Louis M. Hopping, of Detroit, Mich. (John C. Lehr and Louis M. Hopping, both of Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for United States.
Before HICKS, HAMILTON, and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Nicholas Joseph Moskun, an alien, has appealed from an order of the District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan denying his petition for naturalization. His admission to citizenship was steadfastly and vigorously opposed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice.

Upon conclusion of the hearing of testimony on April 12, 1943, the district court directed the preparation of a decree denying the petition, but subsequently granted a rehearing. This rehearing was had on May 17, 1943, when further evidence was received.

Two days later, attorneys representing respectively the petitioner and the Government argued the case to the court. During the argument, the district judge commented upon a letter which he considered had been improperly written to him concerning the case by the president of an international organization. He then read a resolution adopted by a local organization of which the petitioner had once been president. This resolution cast serious reflection upon the fairness of the judge, who, from the bench, immediately expressed his indignation in robust extrajudicial language, announced that improper pressure was being put upon the court, and forthwith denied the petition for naturalization.

In these circumstances, the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded for retrial by another judge in an atmosphere of judicial calm. No extraneous, irrelevant, and incompetent matter should be again injected into the hearing.Page 191