Legal Opinion
Shaw v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided April 9, 1903No. 112PublishedCited by 11 opinions
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
1Opinion of the Court
COXE, Circuit Judge.
The only question arises upon the sufficiency of the protest. The merchandise in question was tapioca flour and was entitled to free entry. Chew Hing Lung v. Wise, 176 U. S. 156, 20 Sup. Ct. 320, 44 L. Ed. 412.
The merchandise was entered for warehouse July 12, 1897. At that time the tariff act of 1894 was in force. It was withdrawn from bond and duties paid thereon September 1, 1897, when the tariff act of that year was in force. 30 Stat. 151, c. 11 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1626].
The protest is as follows:
“New York, September 10, 1897.
“Honorable Collector of Customs: We…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Chew Hing Lung v. WiseSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- United States v. SalambierSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
3Cited by11 opinions
- United States v. Brown, Durrell & Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1903
- United States v. H. Bayersdorfer & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1903
- Rice & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920
- United States v. MaloneCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
- United States v. SternCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.