Louis Goldey Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Louis Goldey Co. v. United States

50 Cust. Ct. 271, 1963 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3891

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedApril 22, 1963

DocketNo. 67613; protest 59/6281 (Los Angeles)

StatusPublished

This text of 50 Cust. Ct. 271 (Louis Goldey Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Louis Goldey Co. v. United States, 50 Cust. Ct. 271, 1963 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3891 (cusc 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of merchandise similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 65376, the claim at 15 percent under the provision in paragraph 231, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52739), for opal glass tiles and tiling was sustained; the items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of earthenware unglazed floor tile, were held dutiable at 5 cents per square foot, but not less than 25 percent nor more than 35 percent ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 202(a), as modified by T.D. 52739, supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 52857), for floor tiles, valued not over 40 cents per square foot, not wholly or in part of cement; and the items marked “C,” stipulated to consist of earthenware unglazed floor tiles, were held dutiable at 30 percent ad valorem under the provision in said paragraph, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802), for floor tiles, valued at more than 40 cents per square foot, other, as claimed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of merchandise similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 65376, the claim at 15 percent under the provision in paragraph 231, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52739), for opal glass tiles and tiling was sustained; the items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of earthenware unglazed floor tile, were held dutiable at 5 cents per square foot, but not less than 25 percent nor more than 35 percent ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 202(a), as modified by T.D. 52739, supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 52857), for floor tiles, valued not over 40 cents per square foot, not wholly or in part of cement; and the items marked “C,” stipulated to consist of earthenware unglazed floor tiles, were held dutiable at 30 percent ad valorem under the provision in said paragraph, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802), for floor tiles, valued at more than 40 cents per square foot, other, as claimed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 Cust. Ct. 271, 1963 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/louis-goldey-co-v-united-states-cusc-1963.