Liu Hop Fong v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 federal appellate · 35 district · 4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““When this young man entered a port of the United States in July, 1899, he presented such a certificate (as the law required) duly issued and visSed by the consular representative of the United States. Upon application for admission this certificate is prima facie evidence of the facts set forth therein. * * * This certificate is the method which the two countries contracted in the treaty should establish a right of admission of students and others of the excepted class into the United States, and certainly it ought to be entitled to some weight in determining the rights of the one thus a dmitted. While this certificate may be overcome by proper evidence, and may not have the effect of a judicial determination, yet, being made in conformity to the treaty, and upon it the Chinaman having been duly admitted to a residence in this country, he cannot lie deported, as in this case, because of wrongfully entering the United States upon a fraudulent certificate, unless there is some competent evidence to overcome the legal effect of the certificate. In this record we find no competent testimony which would overcome such legal effect of the certificate, and the plaintiff * * * was * * * wrongfully ordered to be deported.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ex parte Lam Pui

2. ““While this certificate may be overcome by proper evidence and may not have the effect of a judicial determination, yet being made in conformity to the treaty, and upon it the Chinaman having been duly admitted to a residence in this country, he cannot be deported, as in this case, because of wrongfully entering the United States upon a fraudulent certificate, unless there is some competent evidence to overcome the legal effect of the certificate.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lui Hip Chin v. Plummer

3. ““The appeal given to a Chinaman from an order of deportation made by -a commissioner is a trial de novo before the district judge to which he is ■entitled before he can be ordered to be deported, and the order cannot be made on a transcript of proceedings before the commissioner.” Liu Hop Fong v. United States, 209 U. S. 453 , 28 Sup. Ct. 576 , 52 L. Ed. 888 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States v. Wong Ock Hong