Bloomingdale Bros. v. United States
59 Cust. Ct. 885
Opinion
In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of earthenware similar in all material respects to that the subject of Justin Tharaud & Son, Inc., and J. J. Murphey & Co. v. United States (44 Cust. Ct. 216, C.D. 2177) and United States v. M. & D. Miller, Inc. (41 CCPA 226, C.A.D. 556), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bloomingdale Bros. v. United States, 59 Cust. Ct. 885 (cusc 1967).
59 Cust. Ct. 885 (Bloomingdale Bros. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Justin Tharaud & Son, Inc. v. United States
44 Cust. Ct. 216 (U.S. Customs Court, 1960)