Quong Lee v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Cline, Judge:
These two suits against the United States were consolidated for trial. The merchandise involved consists of two commodities. One is water chestnuts classified by the collector as vegetables in their natural state and assessed at 50 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 774 of the Tariff Act of 193Ó. The plaintiffs claim they are free of duty as chestnuts under paragraph 1646, or dutiable at 35 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 775 as vegetables “if cut, sliced, or otherwise reduced in size” or “prepared or preserved in any other way and not specially provided for.”
The other…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Meyer v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
- 200 Chests of TeaSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Bakelite Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
- Brown v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
- United States v. FloryCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. Fung Chong Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
- Bing Kee & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1946
- Topps Chewing Gum, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- John J. Brunner Agency, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1954
- Fung Chong Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1945
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.