R. Hoehn Co. v. United States
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers. The decision under review is G. A. 5,471, T. D. 24,779, which affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York. The opinion of the Board of General Apr praisers reads as follows: Somerville, General Appraiser.
Read the full summary
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers. The decision under review is G. A. 5,471, T. D. 24,779, which affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York. The opinion of the Board of General Apr praisers reads as follows: Somerville, General Appraiser. The goods consist of eyes for dolls, classified as dutiable at the rate of 60 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph 100, Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule B, 30 Stat. 157 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1633], which provides for “articles * * * colored, * *…
1Opinion of the Court
HAZED, District Judge.
The importation in question consists of glass having a globular shape in imitation of the human eye. For the purpose of fastening the eyes in place, a small hollow extension or stem is provided at the back. The iris and the pupil are skillfully painted or traced in order to complete the resemblance and to effectuate the desired object. The duty assessed by the collector of customs was under paragraph 100, which provides for the payment of 60 per cent, ad valorem. The importers claim the merchandise should have been assessed at 45 per cent, ad valorem, under paragraph…
2Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. FoscatoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915