Nix v. Hedden the respondent and found that the tomato should be classified under the customs regulations as a vegetable, based on the ways in which it is used, and the popular perception to this end. Justice Horace Gray, writing the opinion for the Court, stated that: Justice Gray, citing several Supreme Court cases ("Brown v. Piper," 91 U.S. 37, 42, and "Jones v. U.S.," 137 U.S. 202, 216) stated that when words have acquired no special meaning in trade or commerce, the ordinary meaning must be used by the court. In this case dictionaries cannot be admitted as evidence, but only as
Commissioner v. Duberstein for taxation purposes was the same as "gift" in common law terms. "Duberstein" at 285. The Court also rejected the premise that there is a bright line as to what constitutes a gift for taxation purposes. "Id" at 287. Instead, when determining whether something is a gift for taxation purposes, the critical consideration is the transferor's intention. "Duberstein" at 285-286 (citing "Bogardus v. Commissioner", ). This is a question of fact that must be determined on a "case-by-case basis". "Duberstein" at 290. The body that levies the tax must conduct an objective inquiry that looks to "the mainsprings of human