Steinberg Bros. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Forb, Judge:
The merchandise covered by the suit under consideration is a knit nylon fabric which was invoiced as “Plain Locknit Nylon 30 Denier yarn on 32 gauge two bar machine (Grey).” The collector of customs classified this merchandise under the provisions of paragraph 1309 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T. D. 51802, and as further modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T. D. 52739, as “Knit fabric, in the piece, of other synthetic textile.” Accordingly,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Murphy v. ArnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Arthur v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- United States v. ConkeyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- United States v. Stouffer Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912
- Arthur v. SussfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Empire Brushes, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
- A. L. Erlanger Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
- Judson-Sheldon & Pacific Wood Products Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
- Emery v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
- Garcia Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.