Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sandoz Chemical Works, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided May 19, 1955No. C. D. 1702Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION

Mollison, Judge:

I regret that I cannot concur in either the reasoning or the conclusion reached by my associates in this case, and, in so doing, I wish particularly to express my dissent from the view adopted by the majority that in the interpretation of the language *189used in paragraph 28 (a) a “broad application” is necessary in order to give proper expression to the congressional intent. As I understand the majority opinion, a “broad” view is taken of the term “medicináis,” as found in paragraph 28 (a), as a result of which there is included thereunder a substance which, by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goldsmith's Sons v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  2. Roerig v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1951
  3. Bayer Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API