Davies v. Arthur

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that every protest “must be so distinct and specific, as, when fairly construed, to show that the objection ... was sufficient to notify [Customs] of its true nature and character”
• affirming lower court’s ruling that, at trial, a protester “could only be heard to allege the objections distinctly and specifically stated in their protest”
• affirming lower court's ruling that, at trial, a protester \could only be heard to allege the objections distinctly and specifically stated in their protest\
• noting that sufficiency turns upon whether the protest “was sufficient to notify the collector of its true nature and character, to the end that he might ascertain the precise facts, and have an opportunity to correct the mistake and cure the defect . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).