Case ID: cust-ct_2/html/0737-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Sullivan, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 41520.
    Protest 694661-G of S. Lisk & Bro. (New York).
   Opinion by

Sullivan, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the merchandise in question was held dutiable as follows: (1) tennis rackets at 30 percent under paragraph 1502, Woolworth v. United States (T. D. 48573) followed; (2) rubber novelties similar to those the subject of Abstract 25607 at 25 percent under paragraph 1537(b); and (3) noisemakers in chief value of metal at 45 percent under paragraph 397, Abstract 25607 followed.