Kelly v. Hedden
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIECUIT COUET OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF HEW YORK. This was an action to recover back duties alleged to have been illegally exacted. It was argued with Whitney v. Robertson, ante, 190.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Field
This case, except in one particular, presents the-same questions considered and determined in Whitney v. Robertson. The exceptional circumstance is this, that the act of 1883, under which the duties were levied and collected, to recover which the action is brought, declares that nothing in it “ shall in any way change or impair the force and effect of any treaty between the United States and any other government, or any laws passed in pursuance of or for the execution of any such ■«treaty,, so long as such treaty shall remain in force in respect of the subjects embraced .in this aet.” 22…
2Cited by9 opinions
- State v. LuederSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1977
- Utah Fuel Co. v. National Bituminous Coal CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Hawaiian Trust Co. v. SmithHawaii Supreme Court · 1929
- United States v. Domestic Fuel CorporationCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934
- Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida, Acting as the Dade County Port Authority v. Aerolineas Peruanasa, S.A., Aerolineas Peruanasa, S.A. v. Board of County Commmissioners of Dade County, Florida, Acting as the Dadecounty Port Authority, Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida, Acting as the Dadecounty Port Authority v. Lines Aereas De Nicaragua, S.A., Lineas Aereas De Nicaragua, S.A. v. Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida, Acting as the Dadecounty Port AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.