Montgomery Ward v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Montgomery Ward v. United States

54 Cust. Ct. 315, 1965 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2007

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedFebruary 4, 1965

DocketNo. 69063; protest 63/15495-13702 (Chicago)

StatusPublished

This text of 54 Cust. Ct. 315 (Montgomery Ward 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

Montgomery Ward v. United States, 54 Cust. Ct. 315, 1965 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2007 (cusc 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of miniature railroad equipment, not chiefly used for the amusement of children, the items marked “A,” stipulated to consist of locomotives and other equipment, were held dutiable at 13% percent under the provision in paragraph 353, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52739), for metal articles, having as an essential feature an electrical element or device. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of nonelectrical miniature railroad equipment, were held dutiable at 19 percent under the provision in paragraph 397, as modified by the Sixth Pro-[316]*316toeol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 54108), for manufactures in eliief value of base metal, as claimed.

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

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of miniature railroad equipment, not chiefly used for the amusement of children, the items marked “A,” stipulated to consist of locomotives and other equipment, were held dutiable at 13% percent under the provision in paragraph 353, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52739), for metal articles, having as an essential feature an electrical element or device. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of nonelectrical miniature railroad equipment, were held dutiable at 19 percent under the provision in paragraph 397, as modified by the Sixth Pro-[316]*316toeol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 54108), for manufactures in eliief value of base metal, as claimed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 Cust. Ct. 315, 1965 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2007, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montgomery-ward-v-united-states-cusc-1965.