Electrolux Corp. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Electrolux Corp. v. United States

36 Cust. Ct. 391

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedApril 5, 1956

DocketNo. 59814; protests 269535-K, etc. (New York)

StatusPublished

This text of 36 Cust. Ct. 391 (Electrolux Corp. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Electrolux Corp. v. United States, 36 Cust. Ct. 391 (cusc 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

[392]*392Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the electric floor polishers and electric vacuum cleaners are articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device and that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that involved in United States v. J. E. Bernard & Company, Inc. (42 C. C. P. A. 141, C. A. D. 586), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

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

[392]*392Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the electric floor polishers and electric vacuum cleaners are articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device and that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that involved in United States v. J. E. Bernard & Company, Inc. (42 C. C. P. A. 141, C. A. D. 586), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 Cust. Ct. 391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/electrolux-corp-v-united-states-cusc-1956.