Gray v. Lawrence
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
This was an action [by George Gray] to recover back an excess of duties exacted by the defendant [Cornelius W. Lawrence], as collector of the port of New York, on several invoices of Irish linens, consigned by the plaintiff to Bird, Gillilan & Go., his agents, and entered by them.
Read the full summary
This was an action [by George Gray] to recover back an excess of duties exacted by the defendant [Cornelius W. Lawrence], as collector of the port of New York, on several invoices of Irish linens, consigned by the plaintiff to Bird, Gillilan & Go., his agents, and entered by them. The invoices carried out the prices of the linens in gross, 'with a credit underwritten, “Deduct discount allowed for cash, 7y2 per cent.,” and the plaintiff, by his agents, claimed to enter the goods at the prices less that discount, as being their true market value abroad. The collector, in obedience to circular…
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT
held: 1. That, under the usage proved, the sum to which an invoice was reduced by the rebatement, and not its gross sum, must be regarded as representing the real invoice price;
2. That the secretary of the treasury had no legal power to direct the judgment of the appraisers in valuing goods, or in adding to or subtracting from the charges in the invoices, for the purpose of determining market values; and that the increase of the invoices 5 per cent, in amount, in the manner in which it was done, was without authority of law;
3. That an entry or protest made by an agent is, in láw,…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Balfour v. SullivanUnited States Circuit Court · 1883
- Hancock Gross Mfg., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1975
- Baylis Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1975
- Herman v. SchellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1884
- Mohawk Recreation Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1976
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.