Graemiger Bros. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Laweence, Judge:
This case was originally decided adversely to plaintiff (9 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 696). It is again before us as the result of a rehearing, and has been resubmitted upon a stipulation placing in evidence four illustrative exhibits, as well as the original record herein.
The mechanism in controversy was advisorily returned by the appraiser as an “Old & Used Textile Finishing Machine.” The collector classified it under the provision in paragraph 372 of the Tariff Act of 1930 for “all other textile machinery, finished or unfinished, not specially provided for,” and levied duty…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. Buss & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
- Whitlock Cordage Co. v. Untied StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- Graemiger Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1942
3Cited by6 opinions
- Liberty Lace & Netting Works v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1945
- Dean & Sheek Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
- Paramount Textile Machinery Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Gallagher & Ascher Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
- Textile Printing & Finishing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.