Legal Opinion

United States v. Van Bourgondien Bros.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided November 30, 1928No. 3106PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHatfield, Judge

A metal sterilizing apparatus, designed and used for the purpose of sterilizing flower bulbs, was assessed for duty by the collector as a manufacture of metal at 40 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1599 of the Tariff Act of 1922, which reads as follows:

Tar. 399. Articles or wares not specially provided for, if composed wholly or Sin chief value of platinum, gold, or silver, and articles or wares plated with iplaiinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer, whether partly or wholly ¡manufactured, 60 per centum ad valorem; if composed wholly or in chief value of iron, steel, lead,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Simon, Buhler & Baumann (Inc.) v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  2. United States v. Janson Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Durst Mfg. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956
  2. Standard Milling Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  3. H. T. Kennedy Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1954
  4. Agfa Ansco Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1940
  5. Ansonia Copper & Iron Works v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1939

10 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