Legal Opinion

Lannom Manufacturing Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided July 14, 1965No. C.D. 2556PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nichols, Judge:

The merchandise involved in this protest is limited to two types of balls, invoiced as KID-12 recreation softballs and SID-12 recreation softballs, respectively. They were assessed with duty at 15 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1502 of the Tariff Act of 1930, modified by T.D. 53865, supplemented by T.D. 53877, as baseballs. They are claimed to be properly dutiable at 10 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1502, modified by T.D. 51802, as other balls, not specially provided for, not wholly or in chief value of rubber.

Paragraph 1502, as modified by T.D. 53865, as…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mawer Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1917
  2. Protest 66953-K of New York Merchandise Co.United States Customs Court · 1943

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Byrnes v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  2. Mitsugi Higashi v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  3. Garza v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
  4. Andrew Fisher Cycle Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
  5. Trans Global Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API