Citation network
Kennedy Vs. Mendoza-martinez
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 18, 1963
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 144 (1963) U.S. Supreme Court Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. 144 (1963) Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSearch
-
The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the judgment, 238 F.2d 239. This Court, in 1958, Mendoza-Martinez v. MackeySearch
-
and remanded the cause to the District Court for reconsideration in light of its decision a week earlier in Trop v. DullesSearch
-
this Court noted probable jurisdiction, Mackey v. Mendoza-MartinezSearch
-
the Attorney General from now claiming that Mendoza-Martinez had lost his American citizenship while in Mexico. Mackey v. Mendoza-MartinezSearch
-
Attorney General's current appeal is from this decision. Probable jurisdiction was noted on February 20, 1961, Rogers v. Mendoza-MartinezSearch
-
from Cort on the ground that he is not a citizen and from otherwise interfering with his rights of citizenship. Cort v. HerterSearch
-
which postponed the question of jurisdiction to the hearing of the case on the merits. Herter v. CortSearch
-
U.S. 808. The preliminary question of jurisdiction was affirmatively resolved last Term, Rusk v. CortSearch
-
the District Court's memorandum opinion, findings of fact and conclusions of law, and judgment. See Mendoza-Martinez v. RogersSearch
-
Phillips v. UnitedSearch
-
whatever in this case to invoke the special and extraordinary procedure of a three-judge court. Compare Schneider v. RuskSearch
-
Cromwell v. CountySearch
-
the findings in a prior criminal proceeding may estop a party in a subsequent civil action, Emich Motors Corp. v. GeneralSearch
-
and that the United States may be estopped to deny even an erroneous prior determination of status, United States v. MoserSearch
-
U. S. 44 , and Trop v. DullesSearch
-
U.S. at 356 U. S. 59 . Compare Dent v. WestSearch
-
Hawker v. NewSearch
-
U. S. 303 , 328 U. S. 317 . See also Chambers v. FloridaSearch
-
the fact of administrative and judicial proceedings, including the machinery the Court approved last Term in Rusk v. CortSearch
-
Compare Trop v. DullesSearch
-
imposing an additional punishment for desertion and draft evasion. The first and most important of these was Huber v. ReilySearch
-
held that he was not disenfranchised. Subsequent state court decisions in the post-Civil War period followed Huber v. ReilySearch
-
both in result and reasoning. State v. SymondsSearch
-
Severance v. HealeySearch
-
Gotcheus v. MathesonSearch
-
McCafferty v. GuyerSearch
-
Pa. 109 (1868). Ultimately and significantly, in Kurtz v. MoffittSearch
-
court martial, as was clearly shown by Mr. Justice Strong, when a judge of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, in Huber v. ReilySearch
-
Penn.St. 112, and has been uniformly held by the civil courts as well as by the military authorities. State v. SymondsSearch
-
Goetcheus v. MatthewsonSearch
-
g) and declared unconstitutional in Trop v. DullesSearch
-
j) was enacted in 1944, no such procedural safeguards were built in. See Trop v. DullesSearch
-
adhere to the views expressed in the dissent of MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, in which MR. JUSTICE BLACK joined, in Perez v. BrownellSearch
-
Together with No. 3, Rusk, Secretary of State, v. CortSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial