Keppelmann v. United States

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

Keppelmann v. United States

116 F. 777, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 5037

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided May 31, 1902·No. No. 3,158·Published

Opinion

EACOMBE, Circuit Judge

(orally). This article is concededly a lake, and it seems equally plain upon the proofs that it is also an alizarine color. The government chemist testified that it is a characteristic alizarine color, and that a group or list of alizarine colors [779] would be incomplete ii alizarine lake's were omitted from them. It would therefore seem to be more appropriately included in the enumeration of paragraph 368, which is not qualified with the words “not specially provided for in this 'act,” as is the paragraph 18, which enumerates generally paints, colors, pigments, lakes, etc.

The decision of the board is reversed.

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

EACOMBE, Circuit Judge

(orally). This article is concededly a lake, and it seems equally plain upon the proofs that it is also an alizarine color. The government chemist testified that it is a characteristic alizarine color, and that a group or list of alizarine colors [779] would be incomplete ii alizarine lake's were omitted from them. It would therefore seem to be more appropriately included in the enumeration of paragraph 368, which is not qualified with the words “not specially provided for in this 'act,” as is the paragraph 18, which enumerates generally paints, colors, pigments, lakes, etc.

The decision of the board is reversed.

Keppelmann v. United States, 116 F. 777, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 5037 (circtsdny 1902).

Pincite

116 F. 777 (Keppelmann v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.