Legal Opinion

Charles B. Chrystal Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided March 7, 1940No. C. D. 291PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BrowN, Judge:

This suit against the United States was brought at New York to recover certain customs duties claimed to have been illegally exacted upon an importation of what was described on the invoice and entry papers as powdered pumice or powdered pumice stone.

The collector of customs at the port of New York classified the merchandise as manufactured pumice stone under paragraph 206, Tariff Act of 1930, and assessed duty thereon at the rate of % of a cent per pound.

The importer protested, claiming that the merchandise was neither wholly nor partly manufactured and was, therefore, dutiable…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Fenton v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  2. Gallagher v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Goffigon v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955
  2. Protest 29859-K of James H. Rhodes & Co.United States Customs Court · 1940
  3. Protest 33097-K of Whittaker Clark & Daniels, Inc.United States Customs Court · 1940
  4. Protests 2213-K of Dolliff & McGrathUnited States Customs Court · 1940
  5. Protests 33098-K of James H. Rhodes & Co.United States Customs Court · 1940

7 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