Legal Opinion

Pierce v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided January 11, 1911No. 53PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Transferred from United States Circuit Court, District of Massachusetts, G. A. 6201 (T. D. 26849).

1Opinion of the CourtDe Yries, Judge

This importation was of capers. Dutiable classification was made by the collector at the port of Boston as a vegetable prepared or *172preserved under paragraph 241 of the tariff act of 1897, which was in the following language:

241. * * •* all vegetables, prepared or preserved, including pickles and sauces of' all kinds, not specially provided for in this act, and fish paste or sauce, forty per centum ad valorem.

The provision is under schedule G, which provides for “agricultural products” and a specific subhead.thereunder of “farm and field products.”

The appellant maintains that the merchandise…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Nix v. HeddenSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  2. Komada & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  3. Bogle v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1894

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Bruce Duncan Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  2. Togasaki v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  3. United States v. WallaceCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
  4. Lang v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
  5. Austin v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913

7 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