Opinion

United States v. Vandegrift & Co.

11 Ct. Cust. 333
1922 CCPA LEXIS 31

Court: Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Filed: May 26, 1922
Status: Published
Author: Barber
On the bench: Agreement, Barber, Counsel, Martin, Smith, Vries
Cited by: 0 cases
Authority: More cited than 15.8%

The opinion

CONCURRING OPINION.

Barber, Judge:

I concur in the foregoing opinion, but think it should be noticed that it results in limiting the views expressed in Beuttell & Sons v. United States ( 8 Ct. Cust. Appls. 409 at 420 ; T. D. 37666), wherein, in language of which I was the author, it was said without qualification that Axminster rugs in the statute were “regarded as properly classifiable with the most valuable rugs, such as Oriental, Aubusson, and Berlin.”

The logic of the instant case is to modify the quoted statement in effect by saying that certain Axminster rugs were so regarded.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.