Legal Opinion

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided June 30, 1954No. 58248; protest 192588-K (Baltimore)PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Johnson, Judge:

The merchandise in this case consists of earthenware articles imported from England and invoiced as “Bon Bons,” with names of shapes, such as “Bettws,” “Kipling,” “Cowes,” “Arden,” and “Kingsley.” Duty was assessed thereon at the rate of 10 cents per dozen pieces and 50 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 211 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as “decorated earthenware, not wholly of clay, not tableware.” The plaintiff claims that the articles are customarily used on the table as vegetable or large butter dishes in the service of meals and, therefore, are dutiable as tableware, other…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. W. Kay Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  2. East-West Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955
  3. Baltimore & Ohio R. R. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
  4. United China & Glass Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API