Legal Opinion

California Wool Growers Ass'n v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided March 3, 1955No. 58797; protest 212397-K (San Francisco)PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ford, Judge:

The suit listed above involves the question of the proper classification of certain imported merchandise described on the invoice as “Burdizzo Secateurs” and “Hoof Knives.” It appears that the secateurs were classified as shears, not sheep shears, under paragraph 357 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Annecy Protocol of the Terms of Accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 84 Treas. Dec. 403, T. D. 52373, supplemented by Presidential proclamation, 85 Treas. Dec. 138, T. D. 52476, and duty was levied thereon at the rate of 15 cents each and 35 per centum…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Pacific Guano & Fertilizer Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Castelazo & Associates v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
  2. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  3. Bruce Duncan Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  4. Kroder Reubel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API