Dickson v. United States

131 F. 573, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4933
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
DecidedMay 23, 1904
DocketNo. 3,456
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 131 F. 573 (Dickson v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dickson v. United States, 131 F. 573, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4933 (circtsdny 1904).

Opinion

TOWNSEND, Circuit Judge.

The appellant herein imported under the act of 1894 ginger ale in bottles, upon which the collector imposed a duty of 20 per cent, on the total value of bottles and contents. The board of general appraisers sustained a protest of the importer, holding the bottles to be free, on the authority of U. S. v. Dickson, 73 Fed. 195, 19 C. C. A. 428. The collector, in refunding the excess duty, on the order of the board, withheld the duty collected on the value of corking, wiring, etc., against which the appellant herein had protested. The board found that the claim was well founded, on the authority of West v. U. S. (C. C.) 119 Fed. 495, but held that, as the protest was filed against the liquidation by the collector under a decision of the board, the importer cannot now raise any new questions by a second protest.

This conclusion does not seem to be well founded. In the first place, this protest does not raise a new question, because the decision that no additional duty could be assessed covered the corks and wires as well as the bottles. Furthermore, upon a reliquidation the previous liquidation is abandoned, and the time to protest does not begin to run until such reliquidation. Robertson v. Downing, 127 U. S. 607, 8 Sup. Ct. 1328, 32 L. Ed. 269. The technical objections made to this claim seem to be contrary to the decisions of the courts, and are confessedly contrary to the decisions of the Board of General Appraisers. See G. A. 5,346, 5,406.

The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

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

Related

United States v. Godchaux Sugars, Inc.
11 Ct. Cust. 529 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
131 F. 573, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dickson-v-united-states-circtsdny-1904.