Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Merritt Vs. Park

Merritt vs Park

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Mar-19-1883
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/84568

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
108 U.S. 109
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Merritt

Respondent

Park

Excerpt

merritt v. park - 108 u.s. 109 (1883) u.s. supreme court merritt v. park, 108 u.s. 109 (1883) merritt v. park decided march 19, 1883 108 u.s. 109 i n error to the circuit court of the united states for the southern district of new york syllabus the decision of this court in schmidt v. badger, 107 u. s. 85 , that, under the statutory provisions in question in this case, the proper duty on the importation of glass bottles containing beer was a duty of 30 percent ad valorem on the bottles, in addition to a specific duty of 35 cents a gallon on the beer, confirmed and applied to this case. the facts are all in the opinion. page 108 u. s. 110 mr. justice blatchford delivered the opinion of the court. this is a suit to recover back duties exacted by the plaintiff in error, as collector of the port of new york, on glass bottles imported in march, 1879, from london. the bottles contained beer, and the defendant exacted a specific duty of 35 cents a gallon on the beer and also a duty of 30 percent ad valorem on the bottles. the bottles were the ordinary ale bottles of commerce. the circuit court directed a verdict for the plaintiffs, and they had a judgment, to review which the collector brought this writ of error. the question involved is the same, and arose under the same statutory provisions, as in the case of schmidt v. badger, 107 u. s. 85 . it was there held that such duty on the bottles, in addition to such duty on the beer and ale contained in them, was a lawful duty. that decision governs the present case, and the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded to that court, with directions to grant a new trial.

Full Judgment

Merritt v. Park - 108 U.S. 109 (1883)
U.S. Supreme Court Merritt v. Park, 108 U.S. 109 (1883)

Merritt v. Park

Decided March 19, 1883

108 U.S. 109

I N ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

SYLLABUS

The decision of this Court in Schmidt v. Badger, 107 U. S. 85 , that, under the statutory provisions in question in this case, the proper duty on the importation of glass bottles containing beer was a duty of 30 percent ad valorem on the bottles, in addition to a specific duty of 35 cents a gallon on the beer, confirmed and applied to this case.

The facts are all in the opinion.

Page 108 U. S. 110

MR. JUSTICE BLATCHFORD delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a suit to recover back duties exacted by the plaintiff in error, as collector of the port of New York, on glass bottles imported in March, 1879, from London. The bottles contained beer, and the defendant exacted a specific duty of 35 cents a gallon on the beer and also a duty of 30 percent ad valorem on the bottles. The bottles were the ordinary ale bottles of commerce. The circuit court directed a verdict for the plaintiffs, and they had a judgment, to review which the collector brought this writ of error.

The question involved is the same, and arose under the same statutory provisions, as in the case of Schmidt v. Badger, 107 U. S. 85 . It was there held that such duty on the bottles, in addition to such duty on the beer and ale contained in them, was a lawful duty. That decision governs the present case, and the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded to that court, with directions to grant a new trial.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial