Hampton v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 27870.
1Opinion of the CourtDe Vries, Judge
The importation was of molybdenite. It was classified for dutiable purposes by the collector of customs at the port of New York as a mineral substance partially manufactured under the provisions of paragraph 81 of the tariff act of 1913, in pertinent part reading:
Earthy or mineral substances wholly or partially manufactured.
Free entry is claimed by the importers, who are appellants here, under paragraph 549 of said act, reading as follows:
549. Minerals, crude, or not advanced in values or condition by refining or grinding, or by other process of manufacture, not specially provided for in this…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United States v. Sheldon & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912
- United States v. SalomonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- Schoenemann v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1903
- United States v. Michelin Tire Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- United States v. GodwinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1899
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Rice & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1943
- B. A. McKenzie & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
- Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
- Davis v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1943
- J. E. Bernard & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1953
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.