Barbizon Corp. v. United States

DISSENTING OPINION

Lawkenoe, Judge: For the reasons stated in my dissent in Gimbel Bros., Inc. v. United States, 48 Cust. Ct. 18, C.D. 2308, a companion case, decided concurrently herewith, I am of the opinion that the laces in controversy are excluded from classification in paragraph 1529(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified, and are properly classifiable in paragraph 1558 of said act, as modified, as claimed by plaintiff.

I would, therefore, sustain the protest.