Legal Opinion · Dissent

Adolphe Hurst & Co. v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided January 4, 1946No. 4499Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION

Bland, Judge:

The majority, I think erroneously, conclude that our holding in the General Dyestuff Corporation case that the importation there involved was more than a wax and was a manufactured article (cited with approval by the entire court in United States v. Nippon Co. et al., 32 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 164, 172, C. A. D. 303) was unsound for what I regard as insufficient reasons.

Before considering the questions of law involved, it is highly important to more carefully consider the nature of the imported article at bar, the manner in which it is manufactured, and the uses…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Basket Importing Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  2. United States v. BernardCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API