Legal Opinion

Balfour v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 6, 1922No. 2141PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMartiN, Judge

The merchandise was described in the invoice as canvas cloth, and consisted of plain woven fabrics composed of single jute yarns. The appraiser reported that the cloth was woven in part of colored yarns, and that these constituted a necessary and substantial part of the fabric. Accordingly he returned it for duty as colored fabrics dutiable at the rate of 10 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 279 of the tariff act of 1913.

The collector assessed duty upon the merchandise in accordance with the appraiser’s return, and thereupon the importers protested, denying that the fabrics were colored,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Bryant & BeineckeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920
  2. Bemis Bro. Bag v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. C. R. Daniels, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1946
  2. Nahrgang v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  3. F. Powers Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  4. Bemis Bro. Bag v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
  5. C. Tennant Sons & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API