Legal Opinion

Donalds Ltd. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided June 3, 1954No. C. D. 1619PublishedCited by 60 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mollison, Judge:

The description of the merchandise covered by this protest, and the nature of the assessments of duty made thereon by the collector of customs, are contained in the following stipulation of facts entered into by and between the parties herein as follows:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED as follows:

I. The merchandise covered by the above-enumerated protest is “vapex inhalers”, each of which, as imported, consisted of two parts, namely:(1) A hollow cylindrical holder, made of urea formaldehyde resin, about 2% inches in length and about of one inch in diameter, one end of which…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Altman & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  2. United States v. SchoverlingSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. United States v. Yamamoto & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920

3Cited by60 opinions

  1. Astra Trading Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. Torch Mfg. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  3. James Betesh Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
  4. Arnart Imports, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  5. Silvine Importers, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966

55 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