Legal Opinion

Humphreys v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided October 18, 1966No. P66/273Published

1Opinion of the CourtNichols, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of cedar shorts similar in all material respects to those the subject of Border Brokerage Co. et al. v. United States (52 Cust. Ct. 204, C.D. 2461); that the items of merchandise marked “B” covered by the foregoing protests consist of 2-piece cedar shorts in excess of 24 inches in width; and that under the principles of Clarence S. Holmes et al. v. United States (44 Cust. Ct. 111, C.D. 2161), edge glued maple wood in excess of lumber widths of 9 inches was held dutiable…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  2. Holmes v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  3. Drittler v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  4. Humphreys v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API