From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Buttfield v. United States

U.S.
Feb 23, 1904
192 U.S. 499 (1904)

Opinion

ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.

No. 516.

Argued January 4, 1904. Decided February 23, 1904.

DECIDED on authority of Buttfield v. Stranahan, ante, p. 470.

Mr. James L. Bishop, with whom Mr. James H. Simpson was on the brief, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Edward B. Whitney, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, with whom Mr. Solicitor General Hoyt was on the brief, for defendant in error.


This was a proceeding for the condemnation of seven packages of tea, which had been reimported after export from this country upon a final rejection of the tea by the board of general appraisers as not entitled to admission into the United States for consumption under the tea inspection act of March 2, 1897. Buttfield appeared as claimant, and a demurrer filed on his behalf to the information was overruled. The claimant failing to plead further, a final decree and judgment of forfeiture was entered. A reversal is asked upon the sole ground that the act of March 2, 1897, referred to, is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States. Upon the authority of Buttfield v. Stranahan just decided, the judgment below is

Affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE BREWER and MR. JUSTICE BROWN took no part in the decision of this case.


Summaries of

Buttfield v. United States

U.S.
Feb 23, 1904
192 U.S. 499 (1904)
Case details for

Buttfield v. United States

Case Details

Full title:BUTTFIELD v . UNITED STATES

Court:U.S.

Date published: Feb 23, 1904

Citations

192 U.S. 499 (1904)

Citing Cases

Montana Mining Co. v. St. Louis Mining Co.

The patent in this case is the usual patent, and there is nothing in its terms which permits, suggests, or…