§

In the Matter of Hoefflin

15 I&N Dec. 31 (B.I.A. 1974)
In the Matter of Hoefflin

10 Cited authorities

  1. Williams v. North Carolina

    325 U.S. 226 (1945)   Cited 902 times
    Holding that to accord absolute verity to jurisdictional recitations "would give one State a control over all the other States which the Full Faith and Credit Clause certainly did not confer"

  2. Williams v. North Carolina

    317 U.S. 287 (1942)   Cited 804 times
    Holding that a state has subject matter jurisdiction to grant a divorce if one of the spouses is domiciled in the state

  3. Bank Trust Co. v. Fredrick

    271 Mich. 538 (Mich. 1935)   Cited 96 times
    Noting the distinction between "a want of jurisdiction, in which case the court has no power to adjudicate at all, and a mistake in the exercise of undoubted jurisdiction, in which case the action of the trial court is not void although it may be subject to direct attack on appeal"

  4. Gray v. Richardson

    474 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1973)   Cited 20 times
    In Gray, the court found that the Secretary's finding of no paternity was supported by substantial evidence, but that the Secretary should have deferred to the state court determination finding that the deceased wage earner was the father.

  5. Presbrey v. Presbrey

    6 A.D.2d 477 (N.Y. App. Div. 1958)   Cited 20 times

    November 5, 1958. Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, LOUIS J. CAPOZZOLI, J. Daniel F. Scanlan for appellant. Philip L. Leit for respondents. BREITEL, J. A first wife sues her husband and the woman he has remarried on the ground that the divorce the husband obtained from the first wife in Mexico was a nullity and that the remarriage to the second wife was likewise a nullity. Plaintiff wife appeals from dismissal on motion of her second amended complaint for legal insufficiency and on

  6. Collins v. Celebrezze

    250 F. Supp. 37 (S.D.N.Y. 1966)   Cited 8 times

    January 13, 1966. Solomon J. Freedman, New York City, for plaintiffs. Robert M. Morgenthau, U.S. Atty. for Southern District of New York, for defendant; Dawnald R. Henderson, Asst. U.S. Atty., of counsel. FREDERICK van PELT BRYAN, District Judge: This is an action under § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to review a final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare which denied mother's benefits to plaintiff Carmen Collins and child's benefits to the infant plaintiff

  7. Bair v. Bair

    91 Idaho 30 (Idaho 1966)   Cited 6 times

    No. 9581. June 23, 1966. APPEAL FROM DISTRICT COURT, EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, BONNER COUNTY, CLAY V. SPEAR, J. Greene Hunt, Sandpoint, for appellants. Stephen Bistline, Sandpoint, for respondent. McQUADE, Justice. The opinion of this court filed herein December 31, 1965, is withdrawn and this opinion is substituted therefor. This petition was filed in the Probate Court of Bonner County by the brothers and sisters of the deceased, Samuel Wayne Bair, for the purpose of having themselves declared his

  8. Zeldman v. Celebrezze

    252 F. Supp. 167 (E.D.N.Y. 1965)   Cited 4 times

    Civ. A. No. 64-C-1160. October 20, 1965. P. Benjamin Kaufman, New York City, for plaintiff. Joseph P. Hoey, U.S. Atty., by George Barnett, Asst. U.S. Atty., for defendant. MISHLER, District Judge. This proceeding is brought pursuant to Social Security Act § 205(g), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for judicial review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (Secretary). That decision denied the claim of plaintiff, Rae Zeldman, for wife's insurance benefits based upon the Social Security

  9. Presbrey v. Presbrey

    8 N.Y.2d 797 (N.Y. 1960)   Cited 8 times

    Argued April 19, 1960 Decided April 29, 1960 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, LOUIS J. CAPOZZOLI, J. Daniel F. Scanlan for appellant. Philip L. Leit and Ira S. Rosenberg for respondents. Judgment affirmed, without costs; no opinion. Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, FROESSEL, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE and FOSTER.

  10. Headen v. Pope Talbot, Incorporated

    252 F.2d 739 (3d Cir. 1958)   Cited 8 times
    Giving great weight to forum state's presumptions where parties lived in forum during most of marital relationship