Ruehl v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by the United States against 2007/12 Dozen Wool Hose and Half Hose; Henriette Ruehl, claimant. Judgment for the United States, and claimant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
HOUGH, Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as above).
The findings of the trial court have evidence supporting them. With the weight thereof we cannot deal, and must therefore approach this matter with the fact established that the Scotch Import Company was but a cover for F. W. Ruehl, and that for all purposes of responsibility this importation might as well have been in his own name. This dispenses with all inquiries as to the scope and meaning of the phrase *377“concerned directly or indirectly in” importation. United States v. Scott (C. C.) 74 Fed. 213.
Thus reduced to its lowest terms, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Keck v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- United States v. ScottU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky · 1895
- United States v. A Lot of JewelryDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1894
- United States v. Kee HoDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1887
- United States v. One Blue Taffeta Evening Coat, Trimmed Lace, & Other Women's ClothingDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1916
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. KushnerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Goldberg v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1921
- Bookbinder v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1923
- Feathers of Wild Birds v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- Air Express International Agency, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964