Ferguson v. Arthur
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. cited Arthur y. Davies, 96 U. S. 135 ; Arthur v. Stephani, 96 U. S. 126; Reiehe Y. Smythe, 13 Wall. 162; Movius v. Arthur, 95 U. S. 144; Arthur v. Bheims, 96 U. S. 143 ; Arthur v. Lahéy, 96 U. S. 112; Arthur v. Zimmerman, 96 U. S. 124; Barber y- Schell, 107 U. S. 617; Marvell y. Merritt, 116 U. S. 11; Fisk y. Arthur, 103 U. S. 431; Solomon y.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. cited Arthur y. Davies, 96 U. S. 135 ; Arthur v. Stephani, 96 U. S. 126; Reiehe Y. Smythe, 13 Wall. 162; Movius v. Arthur, 95 U. S. 144; Arthur v. Bheims, 96 U. S. 143 ; Arthur v. Lahéy, 96 U. S. 112; Arthur v. Zimmerman, 96 U. S. 124; Barber y- Schell, 107 U. S. 617; Marvell y. Merritt, 116 U. S. 11; Fisk y. Arthur, 103 U. S. 431; Solomon y. Arthur, 102 U. S. 208; Victor y. Arthur, 104 U. S. 498; Newman y. Arthur, 109 U. S. 132; Drew v. Grinnell, 115 U. S.…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justioe Blatohford
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is an action brought by Walton Ferguson, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, and removed into the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, against the collector of the Port of New York, to recover moneys paid under protest, in January, 1876, as duties • on an importation of “ Henry’s Calcined Magnesia,” made by said Ferguson, doing business as J. & S. Ferguson. The collector exacted on the merchandise a duty of 50 per cent, ad va-lorem, under the following provision of the Revised…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Improvement Company v. MunsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Randall v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Pleasants v. FantSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Schofield v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Bowditch v. BostonSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- First Nat. Bank v. EwingCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1900
- State v. WakeenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
- Cady v. KerrWashington Supreme Court · 1941
- FRANKLIN TP. IN SOMERSET COUNTY, NJ v. TugwellCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
- Tiedje v. HaneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.