Protests 279194-G of Saks

U.S. Customs Court

Protests 279194-G of Saks

3 Cust. Ct. 480

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedNovember 30, 1939

DocketNo. 42700

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Cust. Ct. 480 (Protests 279194-G of Saks) 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

Protests 279194-G of Saks, 3 Cust. Ct. 480 (cusc 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) boxes, bottles, atomizers, jars, photo frames, trays, pincushions, place card stands, tantalus set, pots, flaeons, lamps, coffee sets, teapots, jugs, shakers, cups, caskets, and corks as household utensils at 40 percent under paragraph 339. United States v. Friedlaender (21 C. C. P. A. 103, T. D. 46445), Dow v. United States (id. 282, T. D. 46816), Woolworth v. United States (T. D. 47857), Rice v. United States (T. D. 49373), and Abstract 34153 cited; (2) flasks as hollow ware at the same rate under the same paragraph, Viking Trading Co. v. United States (2 Cust. Ct. 237, C. D. 132) cited; and (3) on the authority of Abstract 8950 toilet sets were held dutiable separately, the brushes at 45 percent under paragraph 1407 and the mirrors at 50 percent under paragraph 230.

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

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) boxes, bottles, atomizers, jars, photo frames, trays, pincushions, place card stands, tantalus set, pots, flaeons, lamps, coffee sets, teapots, jugs, shakers, cups, caskets, and corks as household utensils at 40 percent under paragraph 339. United States v. Friedlaender (21 C. C. P. A. 103, T. D. 46445), Dow v. United States (id. 282, T. D. 46816), Woolworth v. United States (T. D. 47857), Rice v. United States (T. D. 49373), and Abstract 34153 cited; (2) flasks as hollow ware at the same rate under the same paragraph, Viking Trading Co. v. United States (2 Cust. Ct. 237, C. D. 132) cited; and (3) on the authority of Abstract 8950 toilet sets were held dutiable separately, the brushes at 45 percent under paragraph 1407 and the mirrors at 50 percent under paragraph 230.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Cust. Ct. 480, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protests-279194-g-of-saks-cusc-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack