Legal Opinion

United States v. Brown & Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 21, 1920No. 1998PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, G. A. 8276 (T. D. 38088). [Oral argument Dee. 16,1919, by Mr. Earrell and Mr. Brown.]

1Opinion of the CourtDe Vries, Judge

The merchandise herein the subject of decision consists of fish maw or fish sounds. The Board of General Appraisers found from the evidence in the case that they were taken from the fish, cut in half, washed, and dried in the sun, and were to be used for food by the Chinese population in this country; that after importation and in preparation for their use as food they were cut into small pieces or strips, scraped and boiled, and, in the form of soup, as a part thereof, eaten as such. The testimony shows that the cutting or splitting in the first instance, which is done abroad, is for the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. SalomonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  2. United States v. Maine Central RailroadCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
  3. A. Zanmati & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1907
  4. Simpson v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  5. Andrews & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1917

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. United States v. BrownCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
  2. Astoria Pan-Americana, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1954
  3. United States v. MakaroffCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
  4. United States v. BrownCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  5. United States v. MakaroffCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API