Dair v. United States

4 Ct. Cl. 172
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedDecember 15, 1868
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Ct. Cl. 172 (Dair v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dair v. United States, 4 Ct. Cl. 172 (cc 1868).

Opinion

Losing-, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

Iu this case, which was heard on demurrer, two distinct claims are made. The first is for leakages in a bonded warehouse ; and for these a majority of the court are of opinion there can be no recovery, for the reasons stated in the case of Sylvester Thayer et al. v. The United States, recently decided, see ante.

The second claim is for leakages of spirits removed for sale to a wholesale market in 1863, but not stated to be under bond for exportation or under permit from one district to another. And the petition sets forth that the claim was rejected by the Commissioner because, in 1863, there was no regulation for allowance for leakages, except of spirits transported under bond or permit.

The act of 1862 contemplates and provides for the transportation of spirits, before the payment of duty, in no other way [176]*176than under permit or bond; and the proviso of the 12th section of the act of 1863, chapter 74, did not require or authorize the Commissioner to make rides for allowance of leakages, except of spirits so transported. The petition, therefore, does not state a case which called for a rule or an allowance.

A majority of the court are of opinion the demurrer should be sustained.

Casey, Ch. J., dissented.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Ct. Cl. 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dair-v-united-states-cc-1868.