Varsity Watch Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Lawebnce, Judge:
The problem confronting us here is whether certain watchcases of base metal, the bezels of which, before importation, were electroplated with a solution containing a small quantity of gold, are, in a tariff sense,' watchcases of base metal “not containing gold,”' as claimed by the plaintiff, or are watchcases “in part of gold,” as claimed by the Government.
The collector of customs classified the importation as watchcases' “in part of gold” pursuant to the terms of paragraph 367 (f) (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the trade agreement bétween the United States and…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Arthur's Executors v. ButterfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Kenyon Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
- Blumenthal & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
- Steinhardt & Bro. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
- Vantine v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. Cavalier Shipping Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
- Canada Dry Ginger Ale, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
- Robinson v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1949
- Maupin v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1953
- Protest 121817-K of Jarrell-Ash Co.United States Customs Court · 1946