Bloomingdale Bros. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Transferred from United States Circuit Court for Southern District of New York, Abstract 21009 (T. D. 29690).
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge
The appellants in this case imported at the port of New York during the year 1907 several invoices of hairpins and safety pins made of base metal. The chemist attached to the laboratory of the United States appraiser’s office at New York officially reported that all the hairpins were plated with gold; that some of the safety pins were plated with tin, some of them with nickel plate, and that still others were either lacquered or enameled. With the exception of certain black enameled pins, which were assessed for duty under paragraph 188, the collector of customs classified all the pins as…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. HealeySupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Robertson v. DowningSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Komada & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Acker v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- Robertson v. RosenthalSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. Davies Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
- Wanamaker v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- Draeger Shipping Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- United States v. BorgfeldtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
- Varsity Watch Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1946
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.