Lipman's v. United States

DISSENTING OPINION

Lawhence, Judge:

The writer of this opinion is in agreement with his associates to the extent that he considers the imported hose nozzles to be “utensils” in themselves (the Frank P. Dow and the Davies, Turner cases, supra) and that the testimony of plaintiff’s witness Blumberg is adequate upon which the court may find the chief use of the imported articles (the Baltimore & Ohio case, supra).

I am in complete disagreement, however, with the holding of the majority that the uses to which the imported nozzles are put are household uses within the intent of paragraph 339 of the…