CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


BUTTFIELD V. BIDWELL, 192 U. S. 498 (1904)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 192 U. S. 498 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Buttfield v. Bidwell, 192 U.S. 498 (1904)

Buttfield v. Bidwell

No. 296

Argued January 4, 1904

Decided February 23, 1904

192 U.S. 498

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Syllabus

Decided on authority of Buttfield v. Stranahan, ante, p. 192 U. S. 470.

MR. JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

This action was brought by Buttfield to recover damages sustained by being prevented from importing into the United States a large number of packages of Country green teas, being chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 192 U. S. 499

four shipments from China. These teas, on reexamination by the Board of General Appraisers, were found to be inferior in quality to the standard prescribed by law, and Bidwell, as collector for the port of New York, so notified Buttfield. Thereupon the teas were withdrawn from the bonded warehouse, and exported. Judgment was entered for Bidwell upon a directed verdict in his favor. The right to reversal of that judgment is predicated solely upon the asserted unconstitutionality of the Tea Inspection Act of March 2, 1897. It will not be necessary to determine whether, even supposing the statute to be unconstitutional, a cause of action is stated in any of the four counts of the complaint below. The statute having been held to be valid in the opinion just announced in Buttfield v. Stranahan, the judgment must be and is hereby

Affirmed.

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





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED