Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8822657
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Chew Hoy Quong v. White
No. 8822657 · Decided April 1, 1918
No. 8822657·Ninth Circuit · 1918·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 1, 1918
Citation
No. 8822657
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
GILBERT, Circuit Judge (after stating tire facts as above). [1, 2] The denial of the right of the applicant’s attorneys to interview her pending the determination of her application by the immigration authorities was, we think, in itself sufficient ground for holding that the hearing was unfair. Mah Shee v. White, 242 Fed. 868 , 155 C. C. A. 456 . Aside from that, we hold that the fact that the immigration authorities received a confidential communication concerning the applicant’s right to admission, upon which they acted, and which was forwarded to the Department of Labor for its consideration, was sufficient to constitute the hearing unfair. However far the hearing on the application of an alien for admission into the United States may depart from what in judicial proceedings is deemed necessary to constitute due process of law, there clearly is no warrant for basing decision, in whole or in part, -on confidential communications, the source, motive, or contents of which are not disclosed to the applicant or her counsel, and where no opportunity is afforded them to cross-examine, or to offer testimony in rebuttal thereof, or even to know that such communication .has been received. The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded, with instructions to issue the writ.
Plain English Summary
[1, 2] The denial of the right of the applicant’s attorneys to interview her pending the determination of her application by the immigration authorities was, we think, in itself sufficient ground for holding that the hearing was unfair.
Key Points
01[1, 2] The denial of the right of the applicant’s attorneys to interview her pending the determination of her application by the immigration authorities was, we think, in itself sufficient ground for holding that the hearing was unfair.
02Aside from that, we hold that the fact that the immigration authorities received a confidential communication concerning the applicant’s right to admission, upon which they acted, and which was forwarded to the Department of Labor for its c
03However far the hearing on the application of an alien for admission into the United States may depart from what in judicial proceedings is deemed necessary to constitute due process of law, there clearly is no warrant for basing decision,
04The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded, with instructions to issue the writ.
Frequently Asked Questions
[1, 2] The denial of the right of the applicant’s attorneys to interview her pending the determination of her application by the immigration authorities was, we think, in itself sufficient ground for holding that the hearing was unfair.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Chew Hoy Quong v. White in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 1, 1918.
Use the citation No. 8822657 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.