United States v. Roessler & Hasslacher Chemical Co.

99 F. 552, 39 C.C.A. 651, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4166
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided February 6, 1900·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We concur with the judge who tried the cause in the circuit court that this zinc dust is an article in a crude state, used in dyeing, for the reasons given in his opinion. Coming liras within the enumeration of a paragraph on the free list, the provisions of sections 3 and 4 do not apply to it.

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

United States v. Roessler & Hasslacher Chemical Co., 99 F. 552, 39 C.C.A. 651, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4166 (2d Cir. 1900).

99 F. 552 (United States v. Roessler & Hasslacher Chemical Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Leber & Meyer v. United States
135 F. 243 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1904)
United States v. Klipstein
113 F. 1021 (Second Circuit, 1902)
United States v. Klipstein
123 F. 996 (S.D. New York, 1901)