Hoyt, Shepston & Sciaroni Imperial Rug Mills, Inc. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Wilson, Senior Judge:
The merchandise under protest consists of 70 bales of “Used Wool Paper Makers Felt”1 invoiced in several series according to color.
The collector classified the importations as “Wool Waste” under paragraph 1105(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by Presidential proclamation, T.D. 52739, and assessed duty at 9 cents per pound. The Government’s brief at page 1 states that:
* * * It is claimed by the Government that the classification of the Collector was intended to embrace the appellation “wool rags” but as such was technically incorrect. Therefore, while the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Worthington v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- United States v. CitroenSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Joseph Markovits, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
- Dwight v. MerrittSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Protests 112155-K of LobsitzUnited States Customs Court · 1946
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- C. L. Hutchins & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
- Evans v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Joseph Markovits, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
- C. L. Hutchins & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971