United States v. Snellenburg & Co.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, G. A. 8190 (T. D. 37726). [Oral argument Jan. 9 and 10, 1919, by Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Washburn.]
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, Presiding Judge
This appeal is taken on behalf of the Government from a decision by the Board of General Appraisers reported in G. A. 8190 (T. D.37726).
The merchandise in -question consists of Wilton and moquette rugs.
There are three several protests: Protest 770443 relates to merchandise covered by three invoices. Invoice A 15591 covers Wilton rugs represented by Exhibit 2 (27 by 54 inches in dimensions). Invoice B 15591, also included in the same protest, is described as “Carlton tapestry seamless squares.” It also included invoice B 15644, rugs invoiced- as moquette. The protest was overruled so far as it…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Arthur v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Michelin Tire Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
- Beuttell & Sons v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rice & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920
- United States v. Vandegrift & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922