Legal Opinion

M. & D. Miller, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 29, 1952No. C. D. 1410PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Johnson, Judge:

This action involves the classification of earthenware teapots imported from England. The plaintiff claims that the teapots in question are known in the trade and commerce of the United States as Rockingham earthenware and, therefore, they are properly dutiable under the eo nomine provision therefor in paragraph 210, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the trade agreement with the United Kingdom, T. D. 49753, at 12% per centum ad valorem, rather than as decorated earthenware under paragraph 211, Tariff Act of 1930, at 50 per centum ad valorem and 10 cents per dozen pieces.

The…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Nelson J. Elliott v. Samuel SwartwoutSupreme Court of the United States · 1836
  2. Maillard v. LawrenceSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
  3. Newman v. ArthurSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  4. Cadwalader v. ZehSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  5. Butler Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1940

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Justin Tharaud & Son, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  2. Davar Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  3. James Loudon & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1953
  4. United States v. M. & D. Miller, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API