Johnson & Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 42665. (Oral argument October 14,1919, by Mr. Hanson.]
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, Presiding Judge
Duty was assessed on the merchandise covered by the protest here involved at the rate of 60 per cent ad valorem as artificial flowers, under the provisions of paragraph 347 of the tariff act of 1913. The importers claim that duty should have been assessed either at 25 per cent under paragraph 368 or at 15 per cent under paragraph 385 of the act. In this court, counsel states that for the purpose of this appeal he limits his claim as to dyed straw articles to that made under paragraph 385, claiming that such articles should be assessed with duty under that paragraph at 15 per cent ad valorem,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- American Colortype Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919
- United States v. Gage Bros.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
- United States v. International Forwarding Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
- Vandiver v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912
- Lang v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Mottahedeh Creations, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
- United States v. Basket Importing Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- Ringk v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- Louis Weinberg Associates, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
- J. E. Bernard & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965