Legal Opinion

Fritz v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided May 22, 1961No. C.D. 2258PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ford, Judge:

The merchandise involved in the suits listed in schedule “A,” annexed hereto and made a part hereof, consolidated for purpose of trial, consists of certain pulp drying equipment and parts thereof.

The collector assessed duty at the rate of 17% per centum ad valorem under paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T.D. 51802, on the merchandise covered by protest 59/9105, which is described on the invoice as “24-Special Circulating Fans including drives & belts. Pulp mill equipment,” as articles having as…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Holmes v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956
  2. James v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  3. James v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. American SF Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  2. J. J. Gavin & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  3. Costa International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  4. Jagenberg U.S.A., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
  5. Castelazo v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API