U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1952

Di Silvestro v. Gray

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided April 21, 1952 · Fahy, Miller, Per Curiam, Washington, Wilbur

194 F.2d 355 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Joseph Di Silvestro, pro se., Joseph Kovner, Atty.,. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., with whom George Morris Fay, U. S. Atty. at the time the brief was filed, and Edward H. Hickey, Atty., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellee., Charles M. Irelan, U. S. Atty. at the time of argument, and Joseph M. Howard, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., also entered appearances on behalf of appellee., Charles H. Bergazin, Washington, D. C., filed a brief on behalf of the American Legion as amicus curiae, urging reversal.

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Wilson v. Fullwood (District Court, District of Columbia 2011)
Jenson v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management (District Court, District of Columbia 2011)
Wilson v. Fulwood (District Court, District of Columbia 2011)
Joseph W. Di Silvestro v. United States (2d Cir. 1985)
Blanche H. Lober v. Willis Moore (D.C. Cir. 1969)
Di Silvestro v. United States (District Court, E.D. New York 1966)
Jose Estevez v. Horace A. Nabers, Acting Officer in Charge, New Orleans Office Immigration& Naturalization Service (5th Cir. 1955)
Di Silvestro v. United States Veterans' Administration (District Court, E.D. New York 1955)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the District Court, dismissing the complaint, is affirmed. Appellant has had his day in court. Di Silvestro v. United States Veterans’ Administration, D.C.E.D.N.Y.1949, 81 F.Supp. 844, affirmed 2 Cir., 1949, 173 F.2d 933, amended complaint dismissed, D.C.E.D.N.Y.1950, 10 F.R. D. 20, affirmed 2 Cir., 1950, 181 F.2d 502, certiorari denied 1950, 339 U.S. 989, 70 S.Ct. 1014, 94 L.Ed. 1390. Having lost the previous litigation on its merits, appellant cannot now relitigate his cause simply by choosing another forum and by naming as defendant the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs, in his official capacity as head of the Veterans’ Administration, rather than (as previously) suing the Veterans’ Administration as such. See also Baxter v. Pace, 89 U.S.App.D.C.-, 193 F.2d 20.

So ordered.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.