Legal Opinion

United States v. Andrews

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 9, 1924No. 2354PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBaRbeb, Judge

The merchandise in this case was invoiced as “rubber bubbles.” It consists of small hollow tubes of licorice candy to which aie attached small uninflated balloons (so called) composed of rubber so flimsy as to be easily broken. On blowing through the hole in the tube the balloon is inflated. The licorice candy is edible.

One importation was made while the tariff act of 1913 was in force and the other was under the act of 1922.

All the merchandise was classified and assessed as toys; that subject to the act of 1913, under paragraph 342 thereof, and that subject to the act of 1922, under…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Illfelder v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1910
  2. Wolff v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1895

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. StraussCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  2. Leaf Brands, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
  3. Scharf Bros. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
  4. United States v. CarlsonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API