Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Studner v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided January 27, 1969No. C.D. 3679PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OliveR, Judge:

The imported merchandise involved herein consists of certain used print rollers which were invoiced as lamp bases. The collector of customs classified the print rollers as articles, not specially provided for, partly or wholly manufactured, in chief value of metal, under paragraph 397, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T.D. 54108, and assessed duty at the rate of 19 per centum ad valorem.

The plaintiff claims that the articles are properly dutiable as waste, not specially provided for,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. United States v. SchadeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  2. Harley Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
  3. Lackawanna Steel Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920
  4. Midwest Waste Material Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1951
  5. United States v. Geo. S. Bush & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Cheltenham Supply Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  2. Domestic Marble & Stone Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  3. C. T. Takahashi & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1975
  4. Colonna & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1980
  5. Studner v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API