Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Lo Curto

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided December 19, 1929No. 3180Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION

Bland, Judge:

Paragraph 1565 reads as follows:

Pae. 1565-. Cyanide: Potassium cyanide, sodium cyanide, all cyanide salts and cyanide mixtures, combinations, and compounds containing cyanide, not specially provided for. [Italics mine.]

Congress may not have known much about cyanide when it prepared this paragraph, but it certainly did evidence a desire to include •all cyanide substances. It was particular to include certain named cyanides as well as cyanide mixtures, combinations, and compounds containing cyanide.

Mr. Justice Brown asked Mr. McSorley the following question:

You…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Clark v. BarnardSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. United States v. MassinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  3. United States v. Post Fish Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  4. United States v. PealtzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  5. Strohmeyer & Arpe Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911

1 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