Drakenfeld & Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, G. A. 8158 (T. D. 37604). [Oral argument Jan. 9,1919, by Mr. Washburn and Mr. Lawrence.]
1Opinion of the CourtDe Vries, Judge
This appeal has been presented with exceptional fullness of the record and ability of argument both in the briefs and at the oral hearing before .this court. It is agreed that its final determination rests upon the proposition of law as to which of two provisions of the tariff act of 1913, hereinafter quoted, controls. The merchandise was invoiced as “Dunkelpurpur,” meaning dark purple. It is conceded by all parties to be a “ ceramic color” and also a “mixture of which gold constitutes the element of chief value,” within both of the competing provisions of the said act, which are paragraphs…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- American Surety Company v. PaulySupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Magone v. HellerSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Magone v. WiedererSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- United States v. BokerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
- Chew Hing Lung v. WiseSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- United States v. A. W. Faber, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
- United States v. DunhillCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- Comstock v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- Solomon v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- United States v. European Watch & Clock Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.