In re Ottenheimer

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

In re Ottenheimer

49 F. 222, 1892 U.S. App. LEXIS 1604

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1892

StatusPublished

This text of 49 F. 222 (In re Ottenheimer) 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

In re Ottenheimer, 49 F. 222, 1892 U.S. App. LEXIS 1604 (circtsdny 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Wheeler, District Judge.

In this case the question is whether the article — cotton corsets- — is properly classified as “wearing apparel.” In point of fact it is a waist, in which are inserted whalebones or steels for the support of the body and also for the support of the clothing. If you were to ask anybody who did not care anything about the matter in any way, but who know, whether that is an article of wearing apparel or clothing or not, or whether it is a mechanical contrivance, I rather think they would say it is a part of the clothing; that it would help to keep the body warm; and that it answers the purpose of a waist. I think it is clothing. The decision of the board of United States general appraisers may be affirmed. So ordered.

Note. The tariff act of March 3, 1883, was decided to be repealed by the tariff act of October 1, 1890, in Re Straus, 46 Fed. Rep. 522.

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

Wheeler, District Judge.

In this case the question is whether the article — cotton corsets- — is properly classified as “wearing apparel.” In point of fact it is a waist, in which are inserted whalebones or steels for the support of the body and also for the support of the clothing. If you were to ask anybody who did not care anything about the matter in any way, but who know, whether that is an article of wearing apparel or clothing or not, or whether it is a mechanical contrivance, I rather think they would say it is a part of the clothing; that it would help to keep the body warm; and that it answers the purpose of a waist. I think it is clothing. The decision of the board of United States general appraisers may be affirmed. So ordered.

Note. The tariff act of March 3, 1883, was decided to be repealed by the tariff act of October 1, 1890, in Re Straus, 46 Fed. Rep. 522.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 F. 222, 1892 U.S. App. LEXIS 1604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ottenheimer-circtsdny-1892.