Legal Opinion

United States v. Fenton Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 25, 1926No. 2574PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarber, Judge

The merchandise, the classification of which is here involved, is Referred to in the record as herring, but Government counsel in open •court concedes that, for the purposes of this case, it may be regarded •as, and is, sea herring. It is agreed that it has been artificially frozen.

The only question raised is whether, as matter of law, it is properly •classifiable under the duty paragraph 717 of the Tariff Act of 1922 providing for—

Fish, fresh, frozen, or packed in ice: Halibut, salmon, mackerel, and swordfish, 2 cents per pound; other fish, not specially provided for, 1 cent per pound—

*539or,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Strohmeyer & Arpe Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hammond v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
  2. Star-Kist Foods, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API