Legal Opinion

United States v. May Department Stores Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided November 19, 1928No. 3104PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlaNd, Judge

Tbe issues in this case involve the proper classification of graduated bead necklaces in imitation of emeralds.

The necklaces and other articles were imported together. Ap-pellee protested the classification of all of the articles but at the hearing limited the issues to the necklaces. The court below sustained the protest as to the necklaces, from which action the Government has appealed.'

The necklaces were assessed for duty under paragraph 1428 of the Tariff Act of 1922 as “jewelry, commonly or commercially so known, finished or. unfinished, of whatever material composed, valued at above 20…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. American Bead Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
  2. Morse Bros. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
  3. United States v. Doragon Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  4. United States v. FloryCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
  5. United States v. International Forwarding Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Beer Stern Import Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  2. Mottahedeh Creations, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  3. M. Pressner & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  4. Paul E. Sernau, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
  5. Mohawk Iron & Steel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1953

40 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