Walker Services v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Cole, Judge:
A shipment of merchandise, invoiced as “Tinted wool flocks (100% wool),” was exported from Toronto, Canada, and entered at the port of Boston, Mass., where it was classified as wool waste, not specially provided for, under a provision for such merchandise in paragraph 1105 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1001, par. 1105), as amended by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T. D. 51802, wherein the said amended paragraph is set forth in the following form:
Tariff Act of 1930, paragraph Description of Products Rate of Duty
1105 (a) and Wool and hair…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Geo. S. Bush & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1949
- United States v. Post Fish Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- United States v. Imperial Wall Paper Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sandoz Chemical Works, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1950
- C. J. Tower & Sons of Niagara, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
- Emery v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1950
- Empire Wool Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1950
- Empire Wool Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1951
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.