Schweitzer v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtHatfield, Judge
Merchandise, known in the trade and commerce of the United States as “paper-makers’ ■ felt, ” “drier felt, and “woolen-drier felt, ” and imported in the form of “endless belts” for use on a Four-drinier paper-making machine, was assessed for duty by the collector at the port of New York, in protest No. 108214-G, as woven fabrics at 45 cents per pound upon the wool content and 50 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1109 of the Tariff Act of 1922; and, in protest No. 145363-G, as manufactures of wool at 50 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1119 of that act.
The importer claims that the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. Bosch Magneto Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- United States v. American Steel & Copper Plate Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- Welte v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
- Decorated Metal Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
- Durbrow & Hearne Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919
3Cited by57 opinions
- United States v. Janson Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
- United States v. Willoughby Camera Stores, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1933
- John V. Carr & Son, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
- Westinghouse Electric International Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
- United Merchandising Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.