Legal Opinion

Hoenecke v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided June 19, 1946No. (C. D. 1010)PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Cline, Judge:

In this case plaintiff protests the assessment of duty at 8 cents per bushel under paragraph 726 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the trade agreement with Canada (T. D. 49752), on unhulled oats, on the ground that they are entitled to free entry under Public Law 211 or Public Law 272.

Public Law 211 (57 Stat. 607) was enacted on December 22, 1943. It provides in part as follows:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930, the following, when imported…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. Morris European & American Express Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Protest 111000-K of Geo. S. Bush & Co.United States Customs Court · 1947
  2. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
  3. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1947
  4. Geo. S. Bush & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1948
  5. Kerr-Gifford & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API