Legal Opinion

Freni v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided March 27, 1968No. C.D. 3375PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Maletz, Judge:

The issue in this case is whether merchandise is properly classifiable as brushes, or as dog equipment, or as articles of cotton. The merchandise was entered for consumption at the port of Boston as “Brushes, without handles, other,” at the rate of 28 percent ad valorem under Item 750.70 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States, and so classified upon liquidation. Plaintiff claims in the alternative that the merchandise is properly dutiable as (i) “dog equipment” similar to “Dog leashes, collars, muzzles, [and] harnesses” under Item 790.10 at the rate of 12 percent ad…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Kaysons Import Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. F. L. Smidth & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  3. Strakosh v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  4. United States v. SheldonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  5. Nestle-Lemur Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. W. R. Filbin & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  2. Miles v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  3. Pukel v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  4. King Athletic Goods Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  5. Marmax Trading Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970

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