United States v. O. G. Hempstead & Son
Citations
- 153 F. 483
- 1907 U.S. App. LEXIS 5108
Syllabus
<p>1. Customs Duties — Classification—Magnesite Brick — Fire Brick.</p> <p>The phrase “fire brick,” in Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, | 1, Schedule B, par. 87, 30 Stat. 151 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1032], is a well-known commercial designation, which means brick made from fire clay, and therefore does not include magnesite brick.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — Interpretation of commercial and trade terms in tariff laws, see note to Dennison Mfg. Co. v. United States, 18 C. C. A. 545.] •</p> <p>2. Evidence — Official Huporth — Admissibility.</p> <p>An official report by a government chemist, which was made at the request of the Board of General Appraisers, and related to merchandise involved in a case pending before the board, held incompetent because ex parte, not under oath and not subject to cross-examination.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- applying \substantial impact\ test and invalidating rule establishing method of costs-recovery under oil price regulations
- affirming its jurisdiction over a challenge to the validity of an EPAA “interpretive ruling” where the challenge was based on the promulgating agency’s failure to comply with the notice and comment requirements of section 4(b) and (c) of the APA, 5 U.S.C. § 553(b) and (c)
- court found no circumstances compelling conclusion that “may” intended to be mandatory
- collectively referred to as Standard Oil Co.
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McPherson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.