United States v. Ninety-Nine Diamonds
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota.
1Opinion of the Court
SANBORN, Circuit Judge.
This is an action by the United States to confiscate 99 diamonds, under Act June 10, 1890, c. 407, § 9, 26 Stat. 135 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1895], for the administration of the customs, upon the ground that the claimant, Henry Bockstruck, in making his entry, declared that he was the owner and that Simon Fink was the seller of the merchandise, when the truth was that he was the consignee and Fink was the consignor. These were the facts: The diamonds had been sent and invoiced to Bockstruck from Antwerp by Simon Fink, under an agreement that he should pay the duties…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Church of the Holy Trinity v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- United States v. WiltbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1820
- United States v. KirbySupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Durland v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Cochran & Sayre v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by83 opinions
- United States v. Ven-Fuel, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
- Brun v. MannCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Westerlund v. Black Bear Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1913
- McPhee & McGinnity Co. v. Union Pac. R.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- Scandinavia Belting Co. v. Asbestos & Rubber Works of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.