Legal Opinion

Douglas Paper Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided February 18, 1953No. C. D. 1501PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bao, Judge;

The merchandise in controversy in this case consists of toilet paper in rolls. It was classified by the collector of customs at the port of Seattle, Wash., as manufactures of paper, not specially provided for, within the provisions of paragraph 1413 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and assessed with duty at the rate of 35 per centum ad valorem. Plaintiffs have alleged that the collector’s classification is erroneous and assert the more appropriate application of the provision in said paragraph 1413, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T. D.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. Buss & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
  2. Hamilton v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1909
  3. Protest 928980-G of FriedbergUnited States Customs Court · 1939

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Wesley & Winter, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1954
  2. United States v. Border Brokerage Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
  3. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  4. Holmes v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
  5. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959

6 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