Shefer v. Magone
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
At Law. The plaintiffs imported and entered at the port of New York six several importations of women’s dress goods between March 26, 1889, and February 6,1890. The defendant, as collector of customs at the port of New York, levied and collected duties thereon at 9 cents per square yard, and 40 per cent, ad valorem, under Schedule K of the tariff act of March 3, 1883, (Tariff Ind. par. 365.) The plaintiffs protested, claiming that such dress goods were Composed in part of…
Read the full summary
At Law. The plaintiffs imported and entered at the port of New York six several importations of women’s dress goods between March 26, 1889, and February 6,1890. The defendant, as collector of customs at the port of New York, levied and collected duties thereon at 9 cents per square yard, and 40 per cent, ad valorem, under Schedule K of the tariff act of March 3, 1883, (Tariff Ind. par. 365.) The plaintiffs protested, claiming that such dress goods were Composed in part of wool, and were dutiable under the same schedule at 5 cents per square yard and 35 per cent, ad valorem. In making up a…
1Opinion of the Court
Lacombe, Circuit Judge,
(orally.) Section 2931 of the United States Revised Statutes provides that, if the owner, importer, consignee, or agent of imported merchandise he dissatisfied with the collector’s decision as to the rate and amount of duties to be paid thereon, he shall, within 10 days after the ascertainment and liquidation of the duties by the proper officers of the customs, give notice in writing to the collector on each entry, setting forth therein, distinctly and specifically, the grounds of his objection thereto. The statute fixes the time within which the importer must serve his…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Arnson v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Davies v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Pearpoint v. GrahamU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania · 1818
- York's CaseU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · 1870
3Cited by17 opinions
- Geneva Cooperage Co. v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
- Meyer v. Hot Springs Imp. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1909
- Lowry v. StottsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910
- Psaki Bros. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
- Johnston v. New Omaha Thomson-Houston Electric Light Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1910
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.