United States v. Binney

2,222
Decided Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Disposition
affirmed
full scope · unanimous
Scan to open on mobileScan to open on another device
Court
Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
Decided
Judge
PER CURIAM
Posture
Decision of the Circuit Court sustaining the decision of the board of general appraisers
Appellant (1)
UNITED STATES
Wallace MacFarlane, U. S. Atty
v.
Appellee/Importer (1)
BINNEY
Comstock & Brown

Overview

Decision affirmed, on opinion below.

Case summary

This case involves a dispute over the classification of imported merchandise called 'Diamond Steel' under the tariff act of 1894. The collector assessed duty at 35% under paragraph 177, which covers manufactured articles not specially provided for. The importer protested, claiming it should be classified under paragraph 122 as 'steel in all forms and shapes, not specially provided for.' The board of general appraisers sustained the protest, and the Circuit Court affirmed. On appeal, the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that 'Diamond Steel' is a form of steel, not a manufactured article, as it is made by crushing steel ingots, changing only its form, not its character. Thus, it falls under the more specific provision of paragraph 122.

Abstract

The dispute concerns the classification of imported 'Diamond Steel' merchandise under the tariff act, where the collector imposed a 35% duty as a manufactured article not specially provided for, but the importer claimed it as steel in all forms and shapes not specially provided for. The board of general appraisers sustained the protest, and both the Circuit Court and Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling that crushing steel ingots merely changes its form without altering its character as steel, placing it under the more specific provision. The decision was affirmed based on the opinion below.

Opinion of the court

Majority
opinion
PER CURIAMjoined by LACOMBE, SHIPMAN
  • Affirms the lower court's decision that 'Diamond Steel' is classified under paragraph 122 as steel in all forms and shapes
  • Relies on the reasoning of the Circuit Court opinion below

Jurisdiction

not challenged
Subject matter
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdictional facts
  • Appeal taken by the United States from a decision of the Circuit Court

Procedural posture

Posture at trial
Decision of the Circuit Court sustaining the decision of the board of general appraisers
Posture on appeal
Direct appeal from the Circuit Court's decision
Preserved issues
  • Classification of 'Diamond Steel' under the tariff act of 1894

Legal categories

Business

Case record

Full case name
UNITED STATES v. BINNEY
Docket number
2,222
Court
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Trial court
Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
Trial court judge
Townsend, J.
Decided
Opinion author
PER CURIAM
Opinion type
per curiam
Precedential status
precedential
Judges on panel
LACOMBESHIPMAN

Issues & holdings

1
Issues raised
1
affirmed
1
Holdings
Standard of review

De novo (interpretation of tariff statutes)

Disposition rationale

The merchandise is a form of steel, not a manufactured article, and thus falls under the more specific provision of paragraph 122

Preservation

Issue preserved for review

Holdings of the court

Classification of 'Diamond Steel' under the tariff act of 1894
'Diamond Steel' is dutiable under paragraph 122 as 'steel in all forms and shapes, not specially provided for,' not under paragraph 177 as a manufactured article
The article is made by crushing steel ingots, which changes only its form, not its character as steel; paragraph 122 specifically covers steel in all forms and shapes, making it the more specific provision
unanimousbinding precedent

Statutory interpretation

1
Statute
Tariff act of August 28, 1894, paragraphs 122 and 177
Question
Whether 'Diamond Steel' falls under paragraph 122 (steel in all forms and shapes) or paragraph 177 (manufactured articles)
Court's reading
Paragraph 122 is more specific for steel in all forms and shapes; 'Diamond Steel' is a form of steel, not a manufactured article, as it involves only a change in form from ingots
Canons applied
Specific provision over general provision

Standards of review

  • Classification of merchandise under tariff act — de novo Interpretation of statutory provisions is reviewed de novo

Timeline

7
Events
— Approximate import date
Span
othercited in opinion

Tariff act of August 28, 1894 enacted

Statutory basis for classification of imported goods

rulingcited in opinion

Circuit Court of Appeals issued per curiam decision affirming lower court

Outcome: Decision affirmed

Final disposition of the appeal

LACOMBE · SHIPMAN appellate court
After assessmentprocedural eventcited in opinion

Importer protested to board of general appraisers

Outcome: Board sustained protest, classifying under paragraph 122

Administrative reversal of collector's decision

Importer · Board of general appraisers administrative
After board decisionprocedural eventcited in opinion

Appeal to Circuit Court for review of board's decision

Outcome: Circuit Court affirmed board's decision

Judicial affirmation of administrative ruling

Townsend, J. · Parties trial court
After Circuit Court decisionappeal eventcited in opinion

United States appealed to Circuit Court of Appeals

Outcome: Affirmed

Final appellate review

LACOMBE · SHIPMAN · Parties appellate court
After importprocedural eventcited in opinion

Collector assessed duty at 35% under paragraph 177

Outcome: Duty assessed

Initial classification leading to protest

Collector not applicable
Approximate import datefactual eventcited in opinion

Importer imported 'Diamond Steel' merchandise

Triggered classification dispute

Importer · Collector Port of New York

Facts & evidence

Incident

Location
Port of New York

Key facts

6 facts
  1. Importer imported merchandise invoiced as 'Diamond Steel'
  2. Collector assessed duty at 35% under paragraph 177 of the tariff act of 1894
  3. Importer protested, claiming duty should be under paragraph 122
  4. Board of general appraisers sustained the importer's protest
  5. Circuit Court affirmed the board's decision
  6. United States appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals

Disputed questions

  • Whether 'Diamond Steel' is a manufactured article or a form of steel

Procedural history

5 steps
  1. Collector classified 'Diamond Steel' under paragraph 177
  2. Importer protested to the board of general appraisers
  3. Board reversed collector's decision, classifying under paragraph 122
  4. Circuit Court affirmed the board's decision
  5. United States appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals

Evidence in the record

Physical
  • 'Diamond Steel' merchandise
Testimonial
  • Evidence showing the appraiser's description is substantially correct
Documentary
  • Invoice describing merchandise as 'Diamond Steel'
  • Appraiser's description of the manufacturing process

Objects of relevance

'Diamond Steel' merchandiseSteel ingotsCrusher machineSieves or screens for separation

Authorities

Cited authorities (1)

Tariff act of August 28, 1894, paragraphs 122 and 177
appliedquotedprecedent
Statutory provisions at issue for classifying 'Diamond Steel'

Statutes

  • Tariff act of August 28, 1894, paragraphs 122 and 177

Standards & doctrines

  • De novo review for statutory interpretation

Legal principles applied

  • Goods that change only in form, not character, remain classified under the original material provision
Index terms50
Summary terms
Legal mechanisms
Various actions
Various actors
Legal concepts
Legal outcomes
Legal issues
Legal procedures
Legal remedies
Legal evidence
Legal arguments
Legal defenses
Legal penalties
Legal procedural steps
Geo locations
Judges
Attorneys
Procedural terms
Substantive offenses
Entities and documentation
Legal actions
Action type
affirmed
Target
Circuit Court decision sustaining the board of general appraisers' decision
Appealed from
Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
Context
Per curiam decision affirming the lower court's opinion that 'Diamond Steel' is dutiable under paragraph 122 as steel in all forms and shapes
Scope
full
Disposition vote
unanimous
Search facets
Parties
Judges
LacombeShipman
Courts
Locations
Statutes cited