Legal Opinion

United States v. Makaroff

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided December 14, 1926No. 2765PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHatfield, Judge

Merchandise, called “fresh caviar” and consisting of the roe of the sturgeon and imported in tin containers, was assessed for duty by the collector at 30 per centum ad valorem as prepared caviar under paragraph 721 of the Tariff Act of 1922, which reads as follows:

Par. 721. Crab meat, packed in ice or frozen, or prepared or preserved in any manner, 15 per centum ad valorem; fish paste and fish sauce, 30 per centum ad valorem; caviar and other fish roe for food purposes, packed in ice or frozen, prepared or preserved by the addition of salt in any amount, or by other means, 30' per centum ad…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. StoneCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
  2. Cone v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
  3. United States v. Brown & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920
  4. United States v. American Express Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. BrownCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
  2. United States v. MakaroffCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
  3. Frosted Fruit Products Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1947
  4. United States v. SextonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API