Legal Opinion

Border Brokerage Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 16, 1970No. C.D. 3999PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rosenstein, Judge:

The merchandise involved herein, described on the invoices as “Skeena” brand “Clam Nectar”, and imported from Canada in airtight containers, was assessed with duty tmder TSUS item 114.50 at 17.5 per centum ad valorem as clam juice, and is claimed dutiable at 2 cents per gallon under TSUS item 166.40 as beverages, not specially provided for.

The competing provisions read as follows:

[Classified] Schedule 1, Part 3, Subpart E Shellfish juices in airtight containers:

114.50 Clam juice_ 17.5% ad val.

[Claimed] Schedule 1, Part 12, Subpart B

Subpart B headnote:

1. The provisions of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. DeGanay v. LedererSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  2. United States v. BrunettDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1931
  3. Brown v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
  4. W. R. Filbin & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  5. Smith v. RheinstromCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  2. Inter-Maritime Forwarding Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
  3. John H. Faunce, Inc. Masonite v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1978
  4. Casio, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1994
  5. General Mills, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API