Legal Opinion

Shelford, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided March 29, 1965No. C.D. 2520PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nichols, Judge:

The merchandise involved in this case, imported from Hong Kong and entered at the port of San Francisco on June 15, 1953, is described on the invoice as collapsible peel beach chairs and as peel automobile backrests. It was assessed with duty at 45 per cen-tum ad valorem under paragraph 409 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as articles in part of rattan. The protest claims that “Back rests of peel” are properly dutiable at 30 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 409 of said tariff act, or at 12% per centum, 16% per centum, or 20 per *131centum ad valorem under paragraph 412, as modified.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Fabry Associates, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  2. Morimura Bros. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  3. Necchi Sewing Machine Sales Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
  4. Decorative Imports v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  5. Krauss & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Furniture Import Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. Hurricane Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  3. Sprouse Reitz & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
  4. National Silver Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  5. Charles H. Demarest, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968

1 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