Legal Opinion

Joseph Markovits, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided November 14, 1960No. C. D. 2216PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WilsoN, Judge:

The merchandise herein involved consists of certain glass balls on chenille-covered stems (plaintiff’s collective illustrative exhibit 1), which were classified for duty under paragraph 1518 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Protocol of Terms of Accession by Japan to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T.D. 53865, supplemented by T.D. 53877, at the rate of 35 per centum ad valorem, as artificial fruits, not specially provided for, and which are claimed properly dutiable under paragraph 218(f) of the act, as modified, supra, at 30 per centum ad valorem as…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mottahedeh Creations, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  2. Protest 961065-G of Rice, Bayersdorfer Co.United States Customs Court · 1939

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. Hoyt, Shepston & Sciaroni Imperial Rug Mills, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. Block v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  3. Joseph Markovits, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  4. J. E. Bernard & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  5. American Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961

42 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