Legal Opinion

Arnhold & Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided October 11, 1938PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SullivaN, Judge:

These protests involve the dutiability of certain dogskins imported from China in 1932 and 1933.

*171The collectór of customs assessed the merchandise at 25 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1519 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930. The applicable portion of this paragraph is as follows:

Pab. 1'519. (a) Dressed furs and dressed fur skins (except silver or black fox), and plates, mats, linings, strips, and crosses of dressed dog, goat, or kid skins, 25 per centum ad valorem * * *.

It will be observed that this provision relates entirely to furs, fur skins, and articles made from skins,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ishimitsu v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1921
  2. Causse Mfg. Co. v. United StatesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1906

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. S. M. Brachman & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1940
  2. Winograd Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API