Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher v. United States

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

Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher v. United States

135 F. 255, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 5197

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

DecidedNovember 3, 1904

DocketNo. 3,350

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 135 F. 255 (Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher 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

Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher v. United States, 135 F. 255, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 5197 (circtsdny 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

HAZEL, J.

The evidence before the court satisfactorily shows that the merchandise consists of so-styled time detectors having a clock mechanism or time indicator. Duty was assessed under paragraph 193 at 45 per centum ad valorem. This was error. The article should be assessed for duty under paragraph 191, which provides for the payment of duty upon watch movements, etc. 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

HAZEL, J.

The evidence before the court satisfactorily shows that the merchandise consists of so-styled time detectors having a clock mechanism or time indicator. Duty was assessed under paragraph 193 at 45 per centum ad valorem. This was error. The article should be assessed for duty under paragraph 191, which provides for the payment of duty upon watch movements, etc. The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 F. 255, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 5197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hensel-bruckmann-lorbacher-v-united-states-circtsdny-1904.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack