Legal Opinion

Montgomery Ward v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided October 30, 1963No. Reap. Dec. 10612; Entry No. 4146, etcPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement involve certain cameras (and parts), described on the invoices as “Eolleiflex 4x4/ Xenar 3,5 with cases,” which were manufactured by Eollei-Werke Franke & Heidecke; hereinafter called “Franke & Heidecke,” Braun-*432schweig, Germany, and exported to Montgomery Ward & Company, Chicago, between July 1959 and February 1960.

The merchandise was appraised on the basis of cost of production, under section 402a (f) of the Tariff Act of 1980, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956. The parties are in agreement that cost of production is the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. North American Asbestos Corp.United States Customs Court · 1960

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Fashion Ribbon Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  2. A. N. Deringer, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  3. Pacific Wood Products Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API