In re Smith

108 F. 800, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4568
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania·Decided May 13, 1901·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

DALLAS, Circuit Judge.

The appellant imported merchandise which he claims should have been classified under paragraph 340 of the tariff act of June 24, 1897, as “lace window curtains, * * * finished or unfinished, made upon the Nottingham lace-curtain machine, or on the Nottingham warp machine.” The fact, however, is that these curtains, as imported, were only partially made on a Nottingham machine. They were in part manufactured — not merely “finished” — upon another and entirely distinct machine, which greatly enhanced their value. Upon this ground the board of general appraisers overruled the protest which was made against their classification and assessment under paragraph 339 of the same act; and as, in my opinion, this decision was clearly correct, it is affirmed.

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

In re Smith, 108 F. 800, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4568 (circtedpa 1901).

108 F. 800 (In re Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Kurtz
21 C.C.P.A. 12 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1933)