Castelazo & Associates v. United States

60 Cust. Ct. 1050, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1820
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Castelazo & Associates v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 57 Cust. Ct. 67
United States Customs Court·Decided June 25, 1968·No. No. P68/272; protests 63/11168, etc. (Los Angeles)·Published

Opinion

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of wall-hanging fixtures similar in all material respects to the wrought-iron ornaments the subject of Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc v. United States (47 Cust. Ct. 112, C.D. 2289) and that the items of merchandise marked “B” covered by the foregoing protests consist of wall-hanging ornaments similar in all material respects to those the subject of Alpine Importers of Calif. v. United States (55 Cust. Ct. 81, C.D. 2555), the claims of the plaintiffs were sustained.

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

Castelazo & Associates v. United States, 60 Cust. Ct. 1050, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1820 (cusc 1968).

60 Cust. Ct. 1050 (Castelazo & Associates v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc. v. United States
47 Cust. Ct. 112 (U.S. Customs Court, 1961)
Alpine Importers of Calif. v. United States
55 Cust. Ct. 81 (U.S. Customs Court, 1965)