Legal Opinion

Frankenberg v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided October 17, 1944No. C. D. 882PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Oliver, Presiding Judge:

In this case motion was made by the defendant to dismiss the protest on the ground that it was insufficient under section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The merchandise was imported by mail. The protest is in the form of a letter addressed to the United States Post Office, Customs Division, Protest Section. In this letter the entry numbers are set forth, the goods, are described as “sea shell flowers” and “sea shell flower clusters,”' protest is made against the rate of duty of 110 per centum ad valorem assessed against this merchandise, and the correct dutiable rate…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. SalambierSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. Carter v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1910
  3. United States v. Sheldon & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
  4. M. Pressner & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1941

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Simon v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  2. Sonnino v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API