Ayers v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Oliver, Chief Judge:
The merchandise in question is a so-called hydrotherm, which was classified as laboratory glassware under paragraph 218(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified, with a duty assessment at the rate of 42% per centum ad valorem. Plaintiff claims that the merchandise is free of duty as an agricultural implement under paragraph 1604 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which reads as follows:
*337Pab. 1604. Agricultural implements: Plows, tooth or disk harrows, headers, harvesters, reapers, agricultural drills and planters, mowers, horserakes, cultivators, thrashing machine, cotton gins,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. BokerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
- Klipstein v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1910
- United States v. American Express Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- O. G. Hempstead & Son v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
3Cited by1 opinion
- Porsche Motorsports N. Am., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2018