M. S. & J. A. Workman, Inc. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

M. S. & J. A. Workman, Inc. v. United States

32 Cust. Ct. 372, 1954 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1749

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJanuary 20, 1954

DocketNo. 57768; protest 716208-G (New York)

StatusPublished

This text of 32 Cust. Ct. 372 (M. S. & J. A. Workman, Inc. 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

M. S. & J. A. Workman, Inc. v. United States, 32 Cust. Ct. 372, 1954 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1749 (cusc 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

[373]*373Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise described on the invoice as “moufflons,” with or without other words of description or qualification, consists of goatskins from which, during the processing in China, the long guard hairs which cover the skin were plucked out by hand, leaving intact the relatively short hairs comprising the underfur, and that, otherwise, said moufflons were similar in all material respects to the goatskins the subject of United States v. Winograd Bros., Inc. (32 C. C. P. A. 153, C. A. D. 302). In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following United States v. Wotton (53 Fed. Rep. 344), it was held that plucking the skins is not a dressing process. The claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was therefore sustained.

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

[373]*373Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise described on the invoice as “moufflons,” with or without other words of description or qualification, consists of goatskins from which, during the processing in China, the long guard hairs which cover the skin were plucked out by hand, leaving intact the relatively short hairs comprising the underfur, and that, otherwise, said moufflons were similar in all material respects to the goatskins the subject of United States v. Winograd Bros., Inc. (32 C. C. P. A. 153, C. A. D. 302). In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following United States v. Wotton (53 Fed. Rep. 344), it was held that plucking the skins is not a dressing process. The claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was therefore sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Cust. Ct. 372, 1954 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1749, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/m-s-j-a-workman-inc-v-united-states-cusc-1954.