Protests 33329-G of McCreery

3 Cust. Ct. 442
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedOctober 16, 1939
DocketNo. 42450
StatusPublished

This text of 3 Cust. Ct. 442 (Protests 33329-G of McCreery) 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 33329-G of McCreery, 3 Cust. Ct. 442 (cusc 1939).

Opinion

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel embroidered trimmings, allovers, net insertions, flouncings, and trimmings similar to those the subject of Pustet v. United States (13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 530, T. D. 41396) and Abstract 12555, filet lace articles like those passed upon in United States v. Jabara (22 C. C. P. A. 77, T. D. 47065), Normandy lace articles similar to the merchandise the subject of United States v. Amrein (26 id. 353, C. A. D. 40), and embroidered wearing apparel and pillow cases similar to those passed upon in Pustet v. United States supra, were held dutiable at 75 percent under paragraph 1430 as claimed.

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

Related

Pustet v. United States
13 Ct. Cust. 530 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Cust. Ct. 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protests-33329-g-of-mccreery-cusc-1939.