Bloomingdale Bros. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, G. A. 3038 (T. D. 37072). [Oral argument Bel). 12,1918, by Sir. Washburn and Mr. Lawrence.]
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge
Brooches, necklaces, pendants, bracelets, combs, hatpins, and hairpins composed of metal and paste, paste being the component of chief value, were classified by the collector of customs at the port of New York as jewelry and were assessed for duty at the rate of 60 per cent ad valorem under that part of paragraph 356 of the tariff act of 1913 which reads as follows:
356. Jewelry, commonly or commercially so known, valued above 20 cents per dozen pieces, 60 per cent ad valorem; * * *.
Curling irons imported with the above described wares were classified by the collector as “nippers and pliers”…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- American Bead Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
- United States v. BeierleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- A. Bader & Co. v. United StatesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1902
- United States v. S. Schiff & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. European Watch & Clock Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
- S.G.B. Steel Scaffolding & Shoring Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1979
- United States v. BartiromoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919