Legal Opinion

N. Erlanger Blumgart & Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided August 23, 1967No. C.D. 3092PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bao, Chief Judge:

The merchandise involved in the above-enumerated protests consists of cotton suede cloth which was classified as colored cotton cloth, woven with eight or more harnesses, pursuant 4o the provisions of paragraph 904(c) and paragraph 904(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T.D. 51802, and, accordingly, assessed with duty at the rate of 18½ per centum ad valorem or at the rate of 18 per centum ad valorem.

The claim of the plaintiff in the protests is that said merchandise should be properly classified as…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Amitt Fabrics, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Rohner, Gehrig & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  2. Sims-Worms, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  3. Earl Bloom Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  4. N. Erlanger Blumgart & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  5. N. Erlanger Blumgart & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API