Legal Opinion · Dissent

Boone v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided July 5, 1950No. 54528; protests 101808-K and 128755-K (San Diego)Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION

Cline, Judge:

I regret that I am unable to agree that the merchandise involved therein consists of screenings and nothing more.

The merchandise was invoiced and entered as “barley bran” and was assessed ■with duty at 20 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1558 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as an unenumerated manufactured article. It is claimed to be properly •dutiable at 5 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 731, as modified by the •trade agreement with Canada, T. D. 49752, or at 7}{ per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1555, as modified by said trade agreement.

It appears…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. James Richardson & Sons, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1943
  2. Consolidated Elevator Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  3. Williamson v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  4. Boone v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API