United States v. Reed
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 28344 (T. D. 32488).
1Concurrence 1
CONCURRING OPINION.
2Concurrence · VriesDe Vries, Judge
toy colleagues in the conclusion, but not in the grounds of this decision. The decision is predicated upon essentially an agreed statement of facts set forth in the report of the local appraiser, that the merchandise “consists of mussel shells prepared by cutting and boring holes ■and used for ornamental purposes.” The uses of the importation are therein agreed as a fact in the case, and, therefore, the speculation of the court as to the other possible uses, indulged by reason bf the absence of evidence, that the articles “may be articles of shell fully completed and ready…
3Cases cited6 opinions
- Cherokee Nation v. Southern Kansas Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Hartranft v. WiegmannSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Arthur's Executors v. ButterfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Schoenemann v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1903
- United States v. RiggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.