Hayden Co. v. United States

Customs and Patent Appeals

Hayden Co. v. United States

4 Ct. Cust. 35, 1913 WL 19727, 1913 CCPA LEXIS 27

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals·Decided February 18, 1913·No. No. 1005·Published

Opinion

Montgomery, Presiding Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

Large importations of marble products were made, claimed to be the professional productions of a sculptor only. The Board of General Appraisers found that the evidence produced was insufficient to establish the facts claimed. The importer appeals. The sole question presented is whether the finding of the board was justified.

A careful consideration of the record convinces us that the evidence was wholly insufficient to sustain the claim made by the importer.

The decision is affirmed.

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

Montgomery, Presiding Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

Large importations of marble products were made, claimed to be the professional productions of a sculptor only. The Board of General Appraisers found that the evidence produced was insufficient to establish the facts claimed. The importer appeals. The sole question presented is whether the finding of the board was justified.

A careful consideration of the record convinces us that the evidence was wholly insufficient to sustain the claim made by the importer.

The decision is affirmed.

Hayden Co. v. United States, 4 Ct. Cust. 35, 1913 WL 19727, 1913 CCPA LEXIS 27 (ccpa 1913).

Pincite

4 Ct. Cust. 35 (Hayden Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.