Boll v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The fact that the testimony here presented indicates that photomultiplier tubes are not limited exclusively to use in any particular class or kind of device does not obviate the fact that said tubes may, in their diverse uses, be used for laboratory purposes and consequently be subject to classification as laboratory apparatus or parts thereof. The classification of tbe collector of customs carries with it this presumption, which it is the duty of the party contesting it to overcome. The fact that the instant tubes may be used as parts of a variety of apparatus, instruments, and devices does not ipso facto preclude the fact that said apparatus, instruments, or parts thereof may be laboratory instruments or parts thereof, as determined by the collector of customs if said articles are used for laboratory purposes of experiment or study regardless of the situs of such use.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Boll v. United States

2. “* * * the experience of two of plaintiff’s witnesses did not relate back to tbe time of tbe early importations of tbe photomultiplier tubes at bar. Tbe entry papers before tbe court disclose that tbe importations covered a period from March 11, 1958, to March 24, 1961. Two of plaintiffs’ witnesses bad no familiarity with photomultiplier tubes or their uses prior to 1960. Moreover, tbe testimony is in vague and general terms rather than in language clear and specific as to tbe nature and function of tbe uses to which tbe photomultiplier tubes were put in order to negate the presumption of the collector’s classification that, in their use, said tubes were used for laboratory purposes of experiment and study. * * *”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Boll v. United States