Legal Opinion

Floral Arts Studio v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided December 11, 1957No. C. D. 1943PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rao, Judge:

Certain imported merchandise, invoiced as rice paper, was classified by the collector of customs at the port of entry as paper, not specially provided for, and, accordingly, was assessed with duty at the rate of 30 per centum ad valorem, by virtue of the provisions of paragraph 1409 of the Tariff Act of 1930.

Basically, it is the position of plaintiffs herein that rice paper is not paper and, therefore, that the collector erroneously invoked the provisions of said paragraph 1409 in classifying the merchandise at bar. In the 15 consolidated protests which comprise the instant suit,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. Ben Felsenthal & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  2. United States v. Bassichis Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  3. United States v. Illfelder & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Floral Arts Studios v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  2. Davies v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  3. Evans v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API