Friedman v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Maletz, Judge:
Merchandise, which is described on the invoices as “Kissing pins,” “Tyrolean pins,” and “Angel pins,” was assessed by the collector with duty at the rate of 55 percent ad valorem, as “jewelry, commonly or commercially so known * * * of whatever material composed, valued above 20 cents per dozen pieces” under paragraph 1527 (a) (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 51802. Plaintiffs filed protests, which were consolidated for purposes of trial, claiming proper classification of the merchandise under paragraph 412 of the act, as modified by T.D. 52373, as…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- American Bead Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
- United States v. Doragon Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- United States v. International Forwarding Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- United States v. Goldberg's SonsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912
- Tower & Sons v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tanner v. WinfieldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1978