Legal Opinion

Butler Bros. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided March 20, 1940No. C. D. 303PublishedCited by 66 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Keeee, Judge:

This case involves the classification of certain earthenware teapots imported at Portland, Oreg., from Japan. The plaintiffs claim that the teapots are known in the trade and commerce of the United States as Rockingham earthenware and, as such, properly dutiable under the eo nomine provision therefor at 25 per centum ad valorem in paragraph 210, Tariff Act of 1930. The collector assessed the merchandise for duty as decorated earthenware at 50 per centum ad valorem and 10 cents per dozen pieces under paragraph 211.

In an effort to prove the commercial designation of the term…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Ben Felsenthal & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  2. Masson v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912

3Cited by66 opinions

  1. Justin Tharaud & Son, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  2. M. & D. Miller, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
  3. National Silver Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  4. United States v. M. & D. Miller, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1954
  5. Ignaz Strauss & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961

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

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

Powered by the Exa API