Case ID: f_164/html/0912-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PLATT, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES v. PASSAVANT & CO.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    May 12, 1908.)
    No. 4,089.
    Customs Duties (§ 35) — Glassification—“Panne Velvet” — Plush.
    So-called “panne velvet” is dutiable as “plush,” and not as “velvets,” under Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1,- Schedule L, par. 386, 30 Stat.. 186 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1669).
    [Ed. Note. — Por other cases, see Customs Duties, Dec. Dig. § 35.]
    On Application for Review of a Decision by the Board of United States General Appraisers.
    In the decision below, which is reported as G. A. 6,136 (T. D. 26,668), the Board of General Appraisers, one member dissenting, held that importations of so-called “panne velvet” had been improperly classified by the collector of customs at the port of New York as “velvets,” under Tariff Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule L, par. 386, 30 Stat. 186 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1669), and that the material in question should have been assessed at the rate provided in the same paragraph for “plush.” The ground of this determination was the fact that panne velvet was shown by the evidence to be commercially known as “plushes.”
    D. Frank Lloyd, Asst. U. S. Atty.
    Brooks & Brooks (Frederick W. Brooks, of counsel), for importers.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Deo. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PLATT, District Judge.

Affirmed, on the decision of Judge Hough in U. S. v. Silberstein (C. C.) 153 Fed. 965.