Gillespie Bros. v. United States

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Gillespie Bros. v. United States

114 F. 1022, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4907

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedFebruary 3, 1902

DocketNo. 2,847

StatusPublished

This text of 114 F. 1022 (Gillespie Bros. 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

Gillespie Bros. v. United States, 114 F. 1022, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4907 (circtsdny 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

TOWNSEND, Circuit Judge.

The merchandise in question comprises certain shooks imported into the port of New York, and claimed to be free of duty under the provisions of paragraph 483 of the act of 1897. The board of general appraisers held that the shooks were dutiable, on the ground that the treasury regulations had not been complied with. Subsequently, however, under order of court, evidence was introduced by the importers, showing that they had complied in every essential particular with the regulations of the treasury relating to such matters, but that this evidence had not been presented to the board when it made its original finding. 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

TOWNSEND, Circuit Judge.

The merchandise in question comprises certain shooks imported into the port of New York, and claimed to be free of duty under the provisions of paragraph 483 of the act of 1897. The board of general appraisers held that the shooks were dutiable, on the ground that the treasury regulations had not been complied with. Subsequently, however, under order of court, evidence was introduced by the importers, showing that they had complied in every essential particular with the regulations of the treasury relating to such matters, but that this evidence had not been presented to the board when it made its original finding. The decision of the board of general appraisers is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 F. 1022, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gillespie-bros-v-united-states-circtsdny-1902.