Gallagher & Ascher Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
OliveR, Judge:
When these cases were called, they were consolidate for purposes of trial (R,. 2). Susequently, in its brief, plaintiff abandoned its claim under protest 63/3358 and it is, therefore, dismissed without further mention being made of the testimony or exhibit relating to it. Protest 62/17353 is limited to articles invoiced as “HG 14 B Fleur de Lis Light Strings, 36 clear shunted bulbs.” These articles were classified by similitude to illuminating articles, in chief value of prisms, for use in connection with artificial illumination within paragraph 218 (c) of the Tariff Act of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- New York Merchandise Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1942
- Walco Bead Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
- Solomon v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- New York Merchandise Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1946
- Salentine & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Esco Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1975
- Ross Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Aimcee Wholesale Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
- Associated Dry Goods Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.