Legal Opinion

United States v. Hurst & Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 1, 1926No. 2664PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarber, Judge

This appeal involves several protests.

*86In the appraiser’s answers thereto the merchandise is sometimes referred to as lac, bleached, in rolls or in powder, and sometimes as shellac in similar conditions. It was classified and assessed for duty as an unenumerated manufactured article under paragraph 1459 of the Tariff Act of 1922.

Importers protested, claiming free entry under paragraph 1604 of the act which provides for "Lac, crude, seed, button, stick, or shell.”

The Board of General Appraisers sustained the protests. The-Government appealed.

In this court an amicus curise appears in aid of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. Sheldon & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912
  2. Schade & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
  3. Hurst & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Pacific Mutual Sales Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956
  2. Robinson-Goodman Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API