Legal Opinion

Arthur Salm, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided February 1, 1961No. C.D. 2235PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LawRENCe, Judge:

An importation of so-called percussion hammers was classified by the collector of customs as surgical instruments, and duty was imposed thereon at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem, as provided in paragraph 359 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 359), as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 84 Treas. Dec. 403, T.D. 52373, supplemented by Presidential proclamation, 85 Treas. Dec. 116, T.D. 52462.

Plaintiff contends that the merchandise should be classified as articles not specially provided for, composed wholly or in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Empire Findings Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  2. United States v. Kny-Scheerer Corp. of AmericaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Empire Findings Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  2. Carmichael International Service, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  3. Roberto Colon Machinery Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
  4. Arthur Salm, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
  5. Empire Findings Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965

5 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