Legal Opinion

Mackie v. Erhardt

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 17, 1896PublishedCited by 4 opinions

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. This was an action at law by Schuyler Mackie against Joel B. Erhardt, late collector of the port of New York, to recover back an alleged excess of duties paid under protest on certain importations, made during the summer of 1889, of the so-called “Thompson’s Patent Prune Wine.”

Read the full summary

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. This was an action at law by Schuyler Mackie against Joel B. Erhardt, late collector of the port of New York, to recover back an alleged excess of duties paid under protest on certain importations, made during the summer of 1889, of the so-called “Thompson’s Patent Prune Wine.” The collector classified the same as an “alcoholic compound,” and assessed the duty at the rate of two dollars per gallon for the alcohol contained therein, and 25 per cent, ad valorem under Schedule A (Tariff Index, New, par.…

1Per curiam

We conclude that the ruling of the trial judge in this case should be affirmed upon the authority of Smith v. Rheinstrom, 13 C. C. A. 261, 65 Fed. 984, decided by the circuit court of appeals for the Sixth circuit. According to that decision, importations quite similar to those in the present case, and containing about the same percentage of alcohol, were properly classified as an “alcoholic compound,” because falling within the meaning of that term by common acceptation. We do not feel justified, upon doubtful considerations of the true meaning of the term, to place a different construction…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Smith v. RheinstromCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Arnold v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1933
  2. Birn v. Du Pont Cellophane Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
  3. R. J. Saunders Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
  4. United States v. ShoemakerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API