In re Zeimer

66 F. 740, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 3341

This text of 66 F. 740 (In re Zeimer) 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 Zeimer, 66 F. 740, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 3341 (circtsdny 1895).

Opinion

COXE, District Judge.

The question is whether the imported artificial leaves should be classified as “artificial flowers or parts thereof,” or as “manufactures of cotton” and paper. The board found that these leaves were made of colored cotton cloth, metal and wax, cotton being the component material of chief value; that they are suitable for millinery ornaments and are used for branching and making mountings and that they are commercially known, imported, bought and sold as parts of artificial flowers. This finding was upon ex parte testimony, the importers, though invited to do so, gave no testimony before the board. In this court a mass of testimony has been taken which establishes the fact that artificial leaves are imported for three distinct lines of trade and are used by confectioners, decorators and milliners. Only in the millinery trade are leaves known as artificial flowers or parts thereof and not uniformly in that trade. By decorators and confectioners they are known only as leaves. Of course these leaves are not, in fact, flowers, or parts of flowers. Not being artificial flowers in fact, the evidence that they were known as such commercially must be “definite, uniform and general.” It is not enough that they were so known in a single trade. Berbecker v. Robertson, 152 U. S. 373, 14 Sup. Ct. 590; Maddock v. Magone, 152 U. S. 368, 14 Sup. Ct. 588; Cohn v. Erhardt, 44 Fed. 747; Dodge v. Hedden, 42 Fed. 446. As the testimony here is confined to a single trade and is not entirely definite as to that trade it is obvious that no commercial usage has been established within the rule of the authorities cited. The decision of the board is reversed.

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

Related

Maddock v. Magone
152 U.S. 368 (Supreme Court, 1894)
Berbecker v. Robertson
152 U.S. 373 (Supreme Court, 1894)
Dodge v. Hedden
42 F. 446 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1889)
Cohn v. Erhardt
44 F. 747 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1890)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 F. 740, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 3341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-zeimer-circtsdny-1895.