Legal Opinion

Hudson Merchandise Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 25, 1967No. C.D. 2980PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Olivee, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of this protest, described on the invoice as “3 Minutes - Sandtimers,” was classified by the collector as blown glass household articles under paragraph 218(f) of the Tariff .Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 51802 and T.D. 51898, with duty assessed at the rate of 50 per centum ad valorem.

Plaintiff’s protest, as originally filed, claimed a dutiable rate of only 30 per centum ad valorem under a different provision of paragraph *342218(f). However, by way of botb written and oral amendment, plaintiff now claims that the imported items, representing…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. William Adams, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. Oxford University Press, N. Y., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1948
  3. United States v. BergerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  4. John L. Westland & Son, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955
  5. Norge Division, Borg-Warner Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hudson Merchandise Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  2. L & B Products Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
  3. Riekes Crisa Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API