Legal Opinion

Royal Cathay Trading Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided October 4, 1960No. C.D. 2206PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Moluson, Judge:

The above-enumerated protest has been abandoned as to all entries, except entry No. 11016, and as to all merchandise covered by the said entry, except that identified on page three of the invoice filed in connection with that entry as “Rattancore Air Liner Cases #4564, length 23" width 15" height 10" 4 sets of 4 pieces.” The merchandise so described was assessed with duty at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 411, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 54108, for baskets, wholly or in chief value of wood.

The protest claim relied upon is for…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Basket Importing Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  2. United States v. Byrnes & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1921

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Royal Cathay Trading Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. Quon Quon Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  3. H.J. Stotter, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1994
  4. International Artware Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  5. Guy B. Barham Co. 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