Legal Opinion

United States v. Bernard

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 7, 1927No. 2835PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarber, Judge

The merchandise involved in this appeal from the United States Customs Court consists of what is known as “Doctor West’s toothbrushes, hard.” They were classified and assessed as articles in chief value of collodion or celluloid (compounds of pyroxylin) under paragraph 31 of the Tariff Act of 1922 and are claimed by the appellee *173to be dutiable as toothbrushes under paragraph 1407 of the act. Inasmuch as there is no controversy that collodion or celluloid is a component material, that if it is the one of chief value the brushes were properly assessed, and that if not so it should have been…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Seeberger v. SchlesingerSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Seeberger v. HardySupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. United States v. MeadowsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  4. United States v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1907
  5. United States v. Hoeninghaus & CurtissCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Swiss Manufactures Ass'n v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  2. United States v. PealtzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  3. Broadway-Hale Stores, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  4. Ross Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  5. Wheeler & Miller Shelford, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965

12 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