Legal Opinion

Bough v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 1, 1926No. 2528PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGraham, Presiding Judge

Honcan Bough imported on December 18, 1923, certain Chinese umbrellas. The collector at the port of New York classified them for duty as articles not specially provided for, wholly or partly manufactured of bamboo, at 45 per centum ad valorem, under paragraph 407 of the Tariff Act of 1922. The importer protested, claiming the goods to be dutiable as manufactures of paper, at 35 per centum ad valorem,, under paragraph 1313 of said act, and with alternative claims under paragraph 399, as manufactures of metal, under paragraph 1459 as unenumerated manufactured articles, under paragraph 410 as…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Loewenthal v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
  2. Hartranft v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. Solomon v. ArthurSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  4. United States v. AltmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901
  5. United States v. VandegriftCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. John S. Connor, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  2. Markell v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
  3. Vandegrift v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
  4. Byrnes v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  5. Gellman Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1939

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