Legal Opinion

Timber Engineering Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided December 22, 1948No. C. D. 1148PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Laweence, Judge:

Plaintiff imported certain articles composed of steel which are described on the consular invoice as “Split Rings.” They were classified by the collector of customs pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as—

Articles or wares not specially provided for, * * * composed wholly or in chief value of * * * steel * * * but not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer, whether partly or wholly manufactured * * *

and duty was imposed thereon accordingly at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem.

In the original protest, plaintiff…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Simon, Buhler & Baumann (Inc.) v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  2. Arthur's Executors v. ButterfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  3. United States v. FrankCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
  4. Arthur v. SussfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  5. Soule v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commercial Shearing & Stamping Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  2. Kilian Manufacturing Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1950
  3. John A. Steer Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API