Wing Hop Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Wing Hop Co. v. United States

20 Cust. Ct. 313, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 260

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedMay 6, 1948

DocketNo. 52311; protests 972085-G, etc. (San Francisco)

StatusPublished

This text of 20 Cust. Ct. 313 (Wing Hop 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

Wing Hop Co. v. United States, 20 Cust. Ct. 313, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 260 (cusc 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decisions cited, the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) Kumquats similar in all material respects to those the subject of United States v. Fung Chong Co. (34 C. C. P. A. 40, C. A. D. 342) at 1 cent per pound under paragraph 743 as oranges; (2) bak hop, lily bulbs (bak hop), lo hon qua, lotus nuts, sar sum, wai san kwok, wai san (stick), and yuk ehok the same as the merchandise passed upon in Oy Wo Tong Co. v. United States (5 Cust Ct. 70, C. D. 372) were held entitled to free entry under paragraph 1669 as crude drugs; (3) sar sum pen, wai san pen, and yuk juk (tsuk) pen similar to the merchandise involved in Oy Wo Tong Co. v. United States, supra, at 10 percent ad valorem under paragraph 34 as drugs, advanced; and (4) fish in lard with beans similar to that the subject of Abstract 42516 at 20 percent under paragraph 1558 as nonenumerated manufactured articles.

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

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decisions cited, the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) Kumquats similar in all material respects to those the subject of United States v. Fung Chong Co. (34 C. C. P. A. 40, C. A. D. 342) at 1 cent per pound under paragraph 743 as oranges; (2) bak hop, lily bulbs (bak hop), lo hon qua, lotus nuts, sar sum, wai san kwok, wai san (stick), and yuk ehok the same as the merchandise passed upon in Oy Wo Tong Co. v. United States (5 Cust Ct. 70, C. D. 372) were held entitled to free entry under paragraph 1669 as crude drugs; (3) sar sum pen, wai san pen, and yuk juk (tsuk) pen similar to the merchandise involved in Oy Wo Tong Co. v. United States, supra, at 10 percent ad valorem under paragraph 34 as drugs, advanced; and (4) fish in lard with beans similar to that the subject of Abstract 42516 at 20 percent under paragraph 1558 as nonenumerated manufactured articles.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 Cust. Ct. 313, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wing-hop-co-v-united-states-cusc-1948.