Legal Opinion

Holmes v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 1, 1960No. C.D. 2161PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mollison, Judge:

The plaintiff in the above-enumerated protest imported into the United States from Canada certain wood described on the invoice as “Glued Maple S2S” on which duty was assessed at the rate of 16% per centum ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 412, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 52373, for “Manufactures of wood * * * not specially provided for.”

The protest claim is for free entry under the provision in paragraph 1803 of the said act for “Wood: (1) * * * sawed lumber * * * not further manufactured than planed, and tongued and grooved * * with consequent…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. B. A. McKenzie & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  2. C. S. Emery & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Frampton v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  2. Drittler v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  3. C. B. Smith Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  4. Humphreys v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  5. Aaron Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968

2 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