Legal Opinion

Marks v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided February 28, 1952No. C. D. 1393PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Johnson, Judge:

This action involves the classification of certain earthenware teapots and coffeepots which are encased in a metal felt-lined cozy. The articles are in chief value of metal. The collector separated the units for duty purposes, assessing duty upon the earthenware teapots and coffeepots at the rate of 10 cents per dozen pieces and 45 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 211 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as plain white earthenware. Upon the metal felt-lined cozies covering the pots, the collector assessed duty at the rate of 15 per centum ad valorem as household utensils in chief…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Altman & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  2. Isaacs v. JonasSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. United States v. HaakerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
  4. Protest 25547-K of BarrantUnited States Customs Court · 1943

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. James Betesh Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
  2. Prescolite Mfgr. Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  3. Aluminex, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956
  4. Marks v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955
  5. Marks v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952

3 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