Legal Opinion · Dissent

National Silver Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 28, 1966No. C.D. 2666Published

1Dissent

*409DISSENTING OPINION

EiohaRdson, Judge:

The exclusionary rule which was applied to paragraph 212 in the case of Maher-App & Company v. United States, 44 CCPA 22, C.A.D. 630, is equally applicable to paragraph 211 in this case. This rule provides that: “No application of the similitude statute can put it into a classification from which it is expressly excluded.” Cresca Co. (Inc.) et al. v. United States, 17 CCPA 83, T.D. 43376, at page 85; see also United States v. Steinberg Bros., 47 CCPA 47, 50, C.A.D. 727.

Paragraph 211 covers “earthenware * * * composed of a nonvitri-fied absorbent body” and,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Dental Perfection Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API