Legal Opinion

Corham Artificial Flower Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided March 3, 1969No. P69/56; protests 66/61027, 67/65678, and 67/68858 (New York)Published

1Opinion of the CourtWatson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of artificial flowers, trees, foliage, fruits, vegetables, grasses, or grains, and articles made of the foregoing, in chief value of plastic, assembled in the same manner as the merchandise the subject of Armbee Corporation et al. v. United States (60 Cust. Ct. 105, C.D. 3278) and Zunold Trading Corporation et al. v. United States (60 Cust. Ct. 112, C.D. 3279), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Armbee Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  2. Zunold Trading Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968