Legal Opinion
In re Eisner
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
Decided March 14, 1893PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Appeal by the Importer from a Decision of the United States Board of General Appraisers affirming a decision of the collector of the port of New York.
1Opinion of the Court
GONE, District Judge.
The appraisers found that the merchandise imported was a fluid malt extract dutiable at 40 cents per gallon, under paragraph 338 of the tariff of 1890, which is as follows:
“Malt extract, finid, ⅜ * * in. bottles or jugs, forty cents per gallon; solid or condensed, forty per centum ad valorem.”
*672It is said that this is the first time the term “malt extract” ever appeared in a tariff act. The importer insists that it should have been classified under paragraph 75, which reads as follows:
“All medicinal preparations, including medicinal proprietary preparations, of which…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ferguson v. ArthurSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
3Cited by2 opinions
- Johnson & Johnson v. RutanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1903
- United States v. HirshCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1917