Hunter Douglas Corp. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Hunter Douglas Corp. v. United States

28 Cust. Ct. 427, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 322

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedMarch 18, 1952

DocketNo. 56482; protests 155931-K (A), etc. (Norfolk)

StatusPublished

This text of 28 Cust. Ct. 427 (Hunter Douglas 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

Hunter Douglas Corp. v. United States, 28 Cust. Ct. 427, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 322 (cusc 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

At the hearing it was agreed between the parties that the merchandise in controversy consisted of aluminum nonferrous ore manufactures and did not consist of ores or concentrates or other crude substances. Uncontradicted evidence was introduced to the effect that the articles were imported to be used in remanufacture by melting and that they have been used in remanufacture by melting. An examination of the papers disclosed that affidavits have been filed in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Public Law 869, supra. Upon the record presented, it was held that the merchandise comes within the provisions of Public Law 869, supra, and is properly entitled to free entry.

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

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

At the hearing it was agreed between the parties that the merchandise in controversy consisted of aluminum nonferrous ore manufactures and did not consist of ores or concentrates or other crude substances. Uncontradicted evidence was introduced to the effect that the articles were imported to be used in remanufacture by melting and that they have been used in remanufacture by melting. An examination of the papers disclosed that affidavits have been filed in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Public Law 869, supra. Upon the record presented, it was held that the merchandise comes within the provisions of Public Law 869, supra, and is properly entitled to free entry.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 Cust. Ct. 427, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-douglas-corp-v-united-states-cusc-1952.