Chrystal v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, G. A. 7585 (T. D. 34628).
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge
Powdered glass imported at the port of New York was classified by the collector of customs as a manufacture of glass not specially *490provided for and assessed for duty at 45 per cent ad valorem under the provisions of paragraph 109, tariff act of 1909, which, in so far as pertinent to the case, reads as follows:
109. * * * And all glass or manufactures of glass or paste or of which glass or paste is the component material of chief value, not specially provided for in this section, forty-five per centum ad valorem.
The importer protested that the merchandise was dutiable at 10 per cent ad valorem…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Magone v. WiedererSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Sonn v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Cadwalader v. WanamakerSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Hartranft v. LangfeldSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Robertson v. EdelhoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- United States v. IrwinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
- Caracul Fur Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
- John C. Rogers & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1974
- Konishi Kotakudo Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
- Rector Mineral Trading Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.