Legal Opinion

United States v. Mutual China Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided November 25, 1919No. 1968PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 42940. [Oral argument Oct. 15, 1919, by Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Levett.J

1Opinion of the CourtDe Vries, Judge

Wo are here concerned with an importation of chinaware. The articles thereof were assessed for import duty purposes under paragraph 79 of the tariff act of 1913 as earthenware and crockery "painted, colored, tinted, stained, enameled, gilded, printed, or ornamented or decorated in any manner, and manufactures in chief value of such,” and are claimed dutiable under another provision of said paragraph providing for earthenware and crockery "plain white, plain yellow, plain brown, plain red, or plain black, not painted, colored, tinted, stained, enameled, gilded, printed, ornamented, or…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Koscherak v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1899
  2. United States v. HardenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1895

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. E. C. Carter, & Son, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  2. Bunker Hill Brick & Supply, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
  3. Otagiri Mercantile Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  4. Joanna Western Mills Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  5. United States v. Todd & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1921

9 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