Legal Opinion

Quon Quon Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided November 17, 1958No. C. D. 2039PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Moll[som, Judge:

The 26 protests enumerated in the schedule attached to this decision have been consolidated for trial. Each *182of the protests has been limited to the items covered by invoice item numbers 0595 and 0615 and described as "rattan flower cage.” Such items were assessed with duty at the rate of 50 per centum ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 411 of the Tariff Act of 1930 for “baskets * * * wholly or in chief value of * * * wood * * * not specially provided for.”

The claim made in each of the protests relied upon by the plaintiff is for classification under the provision in…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. Byrnes & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1921

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Royal Cathay Trading Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. International Artware Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  3. America Asia Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  4. America-Asia Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  5. Castelazo & Associates, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960

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