Legal Opinion

Hawaiian Independent Refinery v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided November 6, 1978No. C.D. 4777; Court 73-10-02750PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BOE, Judge:

This case presents a question of statutory interpretation and application with respect to the administration of the Foreign Trade Zones Act, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 81a et seq. A foreign trade zone is “an isolated, enclosed, and policed area, operated as a public utility, in or adjacent to a port of entry, furnished with facilities for lading, unlading, handling, storing, manipu lating, manufacturing, and exhibiting goods, and for reshipping them by land, water, or air.” 15 C.F.R. § 400.101 (1972). Pursuant to the provisions of section 3 of the Foreign Trade Zones Act, as amended,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Armco Steel Corp. v. StansCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
  2. Eggerson Fountain, Nace Fountain and Hosea Fountain v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Denbicare U.S.A. Inc., and Ernest McCoy v. Toys "R" Us, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
  2. Nissan Motor Mfg. Corp., U.S.A. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
  3. Conoco Inc. v. United States Foreign-Trade Zones BoardUnited States Court of International Trade · 1992
  4. Nissan Motor Mfg. Corp., USA v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1988
  5. Conoco, Inc. v. United States Foreign-Trade Zones BoardUnited States Court of International Trade · 1995

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API