Legal Opinion

Auster v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided August 4, 1960No. 64432; protest 59/19102 (Honolulu)Published

1Opinion of the Court

Richardson, Judge:

Certain articles, consisting of two black pearl necklaces, one pearl bracelet, four pairs of pearl earrings, and three loose pearls, were purchased by plaintiff while on a trip to Japan, and brought back and declared by him as part of his personal baggage.

The collector of customs at the port of Honolulu classified the articles as pearl jewelry and assessed duty thereon at 55 per centum ad valorem under the provisions of 19 U.S.C.A. section 1001, paragraph 1527 (paragraph 1527, Tariff Act of 1930), as amended, on the ground that the items appeared to be samples.

Plaintiff…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. United States v. MassonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API