Legal Opinion

United States v. Chichester

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 1, 1926No. 2707PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGraham, Presiding Judge

On January'24, 1924, appellees imported certain combs at the Port of New York. These were classified by the collector under paragraph 1428. of the Tariff Act of 1922 as combs composed of metal, valued above 20 cents per dozen pieces, designed to be worn on apparel or carried on or about or attached to the person, at 80 per centum ad valorem. The importers protested, claiming the same to be properly dutiable as manufactures of metal, under paragraph 399 of said act. On appeal, the court below sustained the protest, and the Government appeals.

The competing paragraphs of the statute are as…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gallagher v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
  2. United States v. KressCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  3. Andrews & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1923

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. United States v. R. Hillier's Son Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  2. United States v. Milnor, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
  3. United States v. R. J. Saunders & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
  4. Coty (Inc.) v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1930
  5. Erdosi v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1951

5 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