In re Townsend’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The article has never been sold as a starch, and is not considered in this country as adapted to the ordinary purposes of that article, and has never been manufactured into commercial starch, but it is chemically a starch. The term ‘preparations lit for use as starch’ means preparations which are actually, and not theoretically, fit for such use; wiiich can be practically used as such, and not which can be made, by manufacture, fit for such use. Tapioca flour is used for purposes which are analogous to those for which starch is used. It is not used, though it probably could, by adequate preparation, be used, for the same purposes, unless its use as a sizing can be called the same •purpose. The testimony of the witness upon that subject was not sufficient to justify the stress which the board of general appraisers placed upon it. The very suggestive evidence of the unsuitableness of tapioca for commercial use as starch is that, although it is much cheaper than starch made in tins country, it does not come into commercial competition with starch made here.” 5 C. C. A. 490 , 56 Fed. 224 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Wise · Wise v. Chew Hing Lung

2. ““If tapioca flour was, in our opinion, a preparation fit for use as starch, tlie question would have arisen whetliei* it was specially provided for under paragraph 323; hut, the conclusion being that it was not such a preparation, it has a place only in the free list.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wise v. Chew Hing Lung