Standard Brands Paint Co. v. United States

61 Cust. Ct. 666, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1687
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Standard Brands Paint Co. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 59 Cust. Ct. 616
United States Customs Court·Decided November 15, 1968·No. No. P68/491; protests 67/8136, etc. (Los Angeles)·Published

Opinion

Newman, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of wooden doors similar in all material respects to those the subject of B. A. McKenzie & Co., Inc. v. United States (58 Cust. Ct. 460, C.D. 3020) and that the items of merchandise marked “B” covered by the foregoing protests consists of folding doors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Gitkin Co. v. United States (58 Cust. Ct. 383, C.D. 2997), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.

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

Standard Brands Paint Co. v. United States, 61 Cust. Ct. 666, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1687 (cusc 1968).

61 Cust. Ct. 666 (Standard Brands Paint Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gitkin Co. v. United States
58 Cust. Ct. 383 (U.S. Customs Court, 1967)
B. A. McKenzie & Co. v. United States
58 Cust. Ct. 460 (U.S. Customs Court, 1967)