L. Tobert Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1DissentGarrett, Chief Judge
I respectfully dissent. I do not require the testimony of witnesses to enable me to determine as a matter of fact that the candlesticks or candelabra involved in this controversy are not per se illuminating articles, and there is nothing in this record which seems to me to justify the conclusion that they are something in law that they are not in fact. In my opinion, the articles are themselves witnesses quite sufficient, without more, to overcome the prima facie presumption of correctness which attaches to the collector’s classification.
The word “illuminating” obviously is used as an…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. BlochCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- United States v. WyleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- United States v. KoonsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927