Chrysler Motors Corporation v. The United States

945 F.2d 1187, 13 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1703, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23508
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
DecidedOctober 8, 1991
Docket91-1190
StatusPublished

This text of 945 F.2d 1187 (Chrysler Motors Corporation v. The United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chrysler Motors Corporation v. The United States, 945 F.2d 1187, 13 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1703, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23508 (Fed. Cir. 1991).

Opinion

945 F.2d 1187

13 ITRD 1703

CHRYSLER MOTORS CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-1190.

United States Court of Appeals,
Federal Circuit.

Oct. 8, 1991.

Appealed from the United States Court of International Trade; Judge Gregory W. Carman.

Joseph S. Kaplan, Ross & Hardies, New York City, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was Michelle F. Forte, of counsel.

Joseph I. Liebman, Atty. in Charge, Intern. Trade Field Office, Commercial Litigation Branch, Dept. of Justice, of New York, New York City, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were Stuart M. Gerson, Asst. Atty. Gen. and David M. Cohen, Director. Also on the brief was Edward N. Maurer, U.S. Customs Service, of counsel.

Barton C. Green, Sr. Vice President, Gen. Counsel, Secretary & Treasurer, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., represented amicus curiae, American Iron and Steel Institute. Alexander W. Sierck, Beveridge & Diamond, P.C., Washington, D.C., represented amicus curiae, Automotive Parts and Accessories Ass'n and American Iron and Steel Institute.

Prior Report: 755 F.Supp. 388.

Before NIES, Chief Judge, and NEWMAN and RADER, Circuit Judges.

PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

Chrysler Motors Corporation appeals the decision of the Court of International Trade1 denying drawback for duty paid on certain merchandise transferred by Chrysler to a foreign-trade zone, the court holding that the merchandise is not considered exported on the facts that pertain. On the opinion of the Court of International Trade, which we adopt, the decision is

AFFIRMED.

1

Chrysler Motors Corporation v. United States, 755 F.Supp. 388 (Ct.Int'l Trade 1990)

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

Related

Chrysler Motors Corp. v. United States
755 F. Supp. 388 (Court of International Trade, 1990)
Chrysler Motors Corp. v. United States
945 F.2d 1187 (Federal Circuit, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
945 F.2d 1187, 13 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1703, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chrysler-motors-corporation-v-the-united-states-cafc-1991.