LEE YOU FEE v. DULLES, 355 U.S. 61 (1957)

U.S. Supreme Court

LEE YOU FEE v. DULLES, 355 U.S. 61 (1957)

355 U.S. 61

LEE YOU FEE v. DULLES, SECRETARY OF STATE.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT.
No. 58.
Decided November 18, 1957.

Upon consideration of the record and the confession of error by the Solicitor General, the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court with directions to vacate its order dismissing the complaint.

 236 F.2d 885, reversed and remanded.

Jack Wasserman for petitioner.

Solicitor General Rankin, Acting Assistant Attorney General McLean, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the confession of error by the Solicitor General and of the entire record, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court with directions to vacate its order dismissing the complaint.

Page 355 U.S. 61, 62

 


U.S. Supreme Court

LEE YOU FEE v. DULLES, 355 U.S. 61 (1957)

355 U.S. 61

LEE YOU FEE v. DULLES, SECRETARY OF STATE.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT.
No. 58.
Decided November 18, 1957.

Upon consideration of the record and the confession of error by the Solicitor General, the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court with directions to vacate its order dismissing the complaint.

 236 F.2d 885, reversed and remanded.

Jack Wasserman for petitioner.

Solicitor General Rankin, Acting Assistant Attorney General McLean, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the confession of error by the Solicitor General and of the entire record, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court with directions to vacate its order dismissing the complaint.

Page 355 U.S. 61, 62

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.