Legal Opinion

B. A. McKenzie & Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided July 31, 1957No. C. D. 1903PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MollisoN, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of this protest is described on the invoice as “2-piece stock, sawed lumber, planed, tongued, grooved and edge glued,” and was assessed with duty at the rate of 16% per centum ad valorem under the provision for manufactures of wood, not specially provided for, in paragraph 412 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Presidential proclamation carrying out the Annecy Protocol of Terms of Accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, reported in T. D. 52373.

Although various claims are made in the protest and by timely amendment…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  2. Dollar Savings Bank v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  3. Merritt v. CameronSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  4. Hampton v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
  5. Bache & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. A. N. Deringer, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  2. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  3. American Bayridge Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1998
  4. Frampton v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  5. Holmes v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960

12 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