Legal Opinion

Hurricane Import Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided June 28, 1967No. C.D. 3046PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Watson, Judge:

The merchandise in the case at bar consists of rattan side chair frames, which were classified under paragraph 409 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T.D. 54108, and assessed with duty at the rate of 25% per centum ad valorem under the provision in said paragraph for “Furniture wholly or in chief value of rattan.” The protest was limited to the item invoiced as No. 8137F or 8137 (R. 2).

Plaintiffs in this protest claim the merchandise in question properly classifiable at the rate…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Necchi Sewing Machine Sales Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
  2. Tuska v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  3. United States Willow Furniture Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  4. United States v. Basket Importing Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
  5. Protest 30432-K of Abercrombie & Fitch Co.United States Customs Court · 1943

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Authentic Furniture Products, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
  2. Mitsubishi International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1977
  3. Cal. Asia Rattan Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  4. Hurricane Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
  5. Williams Clarke Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API