Legal Opinion

Hirsch v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided April 18, 1913No. 1070PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 30438 (T. D. 32926).

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, Judge

The merchandise which is the subject of the present review was described by the appraiser as nickel-plated steel strips put up in coils. The articles were returned for duty by the appraiser as manu*83factures of metal not specially provided for, and accordingly were assessed for duty by the collector at 45 per cent ad valorem under the provisions of paragraph 199 of the tariff act of 1909.

The importers protested against the assessment, claiming th© merchandise to be dutiable at 35 per cent ad valorem as strips of steel exceeding 12 feet in length not specially provided for under the provisions…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Eckstein v. United StatesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1905
  2. Victor v. United StatesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1904

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Robert Bosch Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  2. Ozen Sound Devices v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1980
  3. United-Carr Fastener Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  4. Baker Ice Machine Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1940
  5. L. Mendelson Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1942

15 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