United States v. One Package of MerchandiseAnnotate this Case
58 U.S. 98 (1854)
U.S. Supreme Court
United States v. One Package of Merchandise, 58 U.S. 17 How. 98 98 (1854)
United States v. One Package of Merchandise
58 U.S. (17 How.) 98
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
The decision in the two preceding cases again affirmed.
This case was similar in its circumstances to the case of United States v. Sixty-Seven Packages of Dry Goods.
MR. JUSTICE NELSON delivered the opinion of the Court.
The libel of information was filed in this case in the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana for the condemnation and forfeiture of one package of goods, the entry, as charged, having been made upon an invoice in which the goods were invoiced under their actual cost value at the place of exportation, with a design to defraud the duties. After the evidence was heard, the jury, under the instructions, found a verdict for the plaintiffs.
The court afterwards arrested the judgment for the plaintiffs and directed a judgment for the claimants on the ground that the 66th section of the act of 1799 had been repealed, which judgment was affirmed on error by the circuit court.
For the reason given in the case of United States v. Sixty-Seven Packages of Dry Goods, the judgment below must be
Reversed and the record remitted to the court for further proceedings in conformity to the opinion of this Court.
MR. JUSTICE CAMPBELL dissented.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this Court, that the judgment of the said circuit court in this cause be and the same is hereby reversed, and that this cause be and the same is hereby remanded to the said circuit court for further proceedings to be had therein in conformity to the opinion of this Court.
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.