Strohmeyer & Arpe Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Dissent
DISSENTING OPINION
Oliver, Presiding Judge:
I am constrained to dissent from the decision of my associates herein. I concur insofar as the decision holds that the product before the court is a wax and not a manufacture of wax and that the collector erred in assessing duty on it as such. I am of opinion, however, that this merchandise is properly entitled to entry free of duty as claimed by plaintiff herein.
*258The master rule of construction in customs litigation has ever been to interpret the intent of Congress (United States v. Clay Adams Co., 20 C. C. P. A. 285/288, T. D. 46078). As far back as…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. Stone & Downer Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Bayersdorfer v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
- Adolphe Hurst & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1941