Legal Opinion

Beuttell v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided December 21, 1916No. 1696PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appesa'l from Board of United States General Appraisers, G. A. 7874 (T. D. 36229).

1Opinion of the CourtDe Yries, Judge

The legislative conspectus, the construction of which is by this appeal presented to the court, is embraced in the following paragraphs of the tariff act of 1913:

293. Aubusson, Axminster, moquette, and chenille carpets, figured or plain, and all carpets or carpeting of like character or description, 35 per centum ad valorem.

294. Saxony, Milton, and Tournay velvet carpets, figured or plain, and all carpets or carpeting of like character or description, 30 per centum ad valorem.

296. Velvet and tapestry velvet carpets, figured or plain, printed on the warp or otherwise, and all carpets or…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Beuttell v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. Stone & Downer Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Beuttell & Sons v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  3. United States v. Trorlicht, Duncker Carpet Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1921
  4. United States v. Vandegrift & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API