F. W. Woolworth Co. v. United States
62 Cust. Ct. 1075
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in F. W. Woolworth Co. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 67 Cust. Ct. 9 →
United States Customs Court·Decided March 24, 1969·No. No. P69/78; protests 67/6429 and 67/6430 (Philadelphia); No. P69/79; protests 67/43480, etc. (Los Angeles); No. P69/80; protests 67/90067, etc. (Honolulu)·Published
Opinion
In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by filie foregoing protests consists of artificial flowers in Chief value of plastic, assembled in the same manner as the plastic artificial flowers in Armbee Corporation et al. v. United States (60 Cust. Ct. 105, C.D. 3278) and Zunold Trading Corporation et al. v. United States (60 Cust. Ct. 112, C.D. 3279), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. United States, 62 Cust. Ct. 1075 (cusc 1969).
62 Cust. Ct. 1075 (F. W. Woolworth Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Armbee Corp. v. United States
60 Cust. Ct. 105 (U.S. Customs Court, 1968)
Zunold Trading Corp. v. United States
60 Cust. Ct. 112 (U.S. Customs Court, 1968)