M. W. Zack Metal Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

M. W. Zack Metal Co. v. United States

29 Cust. Ct. 341, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1462

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in M. W. Zack Metal Co. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 26 Cust. Ct. 91 →

United States Customs Court·Decided July 2, 1952·No. No. 56782; protests 151521-K, etc. (Detroit)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of a zinc die-casting alloy similar in all material respects to the product passed upon in M. W. Zack Metal Company v. United States (26 Cust. Ct. 91, C. D. 1306), which the court held to be classifiable under paragraph 397 as articles in chief value of zinc, not specially provided for. However, inasmuch as the plaintiff in the cited case did not claim classification under paragraph 397, the protest therein was overruled without affirming the collector’s classification. On the record presented herein, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.

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

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of a zinc die-casting alloy similar in all material respects to the product passed upon in M. W. Zack Metal Company v. United States (26 Cust. Ct. 91, C. D. 1306), which the court held to be classifiable under paragraph 397 as articles in chief value of zinc, not specially provided for. However, inasmuch as the plaintiff in the cited case did not claim classification under paragraph 397, the protest therein was overruled without affirming the collector’s classification. On the record presented herein, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.

M. W. Zack Metal Co. v. United States, 29 Cust. Ct. 341, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1462 (cusc 1952).

Pincite

29 Cust. Ct. 341 (M. W. Zack Metal Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related