Seeberger v. Schweyer

153 U.S. 609 (1894) · Supreme Court of the United States · May 14, 1894 · No. No. 295

Summary

This Supreme Court case addresses whether the one-year period for withdrawing imported merchandise from a bonded warehouse runs from the date of arrival at the port of first importation or the interior port of destination. Interpreting Section 2970 of the Revised Statutes and the Act of June 10, 1880, the Court held that the statutory phrase "date of original importation" refers to the exterior port where the goods first arrived. Consequently, the Court reversed the lower court's judgment in favor of the importer, ruling that an additional ten percent duty was properly assessed because the goods were withdrawn after the one-year deadline had passed.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Writing for the Court
Shiras; Harlan
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
May 14, 1894
Docket number
No. 295
Procedural posture
Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
published
Parties
John Schweyer v. Anthony F. Seeberger
Disposition
reversed

Topics

statutory interpretationtax

Practice areas

tax

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the phrase “date of original importation” in §2970 of the Revised Statutes refers to the exterior port of first arrival (New York) or the interior port of destination (Chicago).

Holdings

  1. The phrase “date of original importation” refers to the exterior port of first arrival (the port of New York), not the interior port of destination (Chicago).

Key quotations

The words “date of original importation,” as used in Eev. Stat. § 2970, refer to the exterior port of first arrival of the merchandise, and not to the interior port of destination. (610)
Upon the whole, we conclude that the court below erred in refusing the defendant's request to hold the law to be that the port of New York was the port of original importation, and not the port of Chicago; and as this was a case of a special finding which ascertained all the facts of the case, there is no reason for awarding a new trial. (614)

Factual background

In October 1886 Schweyer imported merchandise at the port of New York, which was transported to Chicago and entered into a bonded warehouse on December 11, 1886. The customs collector assessed an additional 10% duty after a year, claiming the "date of original importation" was the New York arrival. Schweyer paid the duty under protest and later withdrew the goods for consumption in Chicago on November 2, 1887.

Procedural history

Schweyer, an importer, sued Seeberger, the collector of customs, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois to recover duties paid under protest. The circuit court ruled in Schweyer's favor. The decision was taken to the Supreme Court on error.

Remand instructions

Case remanded to the Circuit Court with directions to enter judgment for the original defendant.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…