Legal Opinion

United States v. American Express Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 29, 1916No. 1667PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, G. A. 7826 (T. D. 35970).

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge

Parts of a class of moving-picture machines which are known by the coined designation “pathescopes” were classified by the collector of customs at the port of New York as frames and mountings for optical instruments and assessed for duty at 35 percent ad valorem under paragraph 93 of the act of 1913, which paragraph reads as follows:

93. Opera and field glasses, optical instruments and frames and mountings for the same; all the foregoing not specially provided for in this section, 35 per centum ad valorem.

The importer claimed that the goods were dutiable either under paragraph 94 at 25 per…

2Cited by15 opinions

  1. Manca, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  2. United States v. International Forwarding Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919
  3. B. B. T. Corp. of America v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  4. Lietz Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1923
  5. Thomas Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API