Legal Opinion

United States v. Fondeville

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 23, 1916No. 1654PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 38696.

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge

Plain stemmed glassware, some of which was entered under the tariff act of 1909 and some under the act of 1913, was classified by the collector of customs at the port of New York as glassware composed wholly or in chief value of blown glass. As required by the date of importation, some of the goods were assessed for duty under paragraph 98 of the act of 1909 and some under paragraph 84 of the act of 1913. The parts of paragraph 98 of the act of 1909 and paragraph 84 of the act of 1913 which are pertinent to the case are as follows:

98. ⅝ ⅜ * All articles of every description, including-bottles…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Seeberger v. HardySupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  2. United States v. GredelueCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Turner & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
  2. Fensterer & Voss Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
  3. United States v. PerezCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
  4. Adolf Goldmark & Sons Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API