Legal Opinion

Turner & Co. v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided January 24, 1924No. 2264PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MartiN, Presiding Judge,

delivered.the opinion of the court:

The merchandise now upon appeal consists of thermos bottles. Each of these is composed of a blown-glass bottle incased in a metal container made of iron and aluminum. The appraiser reported that they were dutiable at the rate of 45 per cent ad valorem as non-enumerated articles composed in chief value of blown glass, under *49paragraph 84, tariff act of 1913. The collector accordingly assessed duty at that rate.

The importers protested against the assessment, claiming that the articles were composed in chief value of metal, not glass, and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Seeberger v. HardySupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  2. United States v. MeadowsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  3. United States v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1907
  4. United States v. Hoeninghaus & CurtissCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905
  5. United States v. FondevilleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Walco Bead Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
  2. United States v. F. B. Vandegrift & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  3. Swiss Manufactures Ass'n v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  4. Borneo Sumatra Trading Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  5. Vandergrift Forwarding Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956

16 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