Legal Opinion

Julius Forstmann & Co. v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 6, 1939No. 4157PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJaceson, Judge

This appeal concerns the proper classification of certain machines held by the collector at the port of New York to be dutiable at 40 per centum ad valorem as textile machinery, not specially provided for, under paragraph 372 of the Tariff Act of 1930.

The importer protested against the classification, claiming the machines to be dutiable at 35 per centum ad valorem as “articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device” under paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, or at 27% per centum ad va-lorem as 'machines not specially provided for, or at 30 per centum ad valorem…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Swift & Co. v. Hocking Valley Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
  2. Whitlock Cordage Co. v. Untied StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
  3. Salomon v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
  4. United States v. A. W. Fenton Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Impresa Construzioni Geom. Domenico Garufi v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API