Legal Opinion

Preload Construction Corp. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided February 13, 1957No. C. D. 1844PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lawrence, Judge:

This cause of action, embracing four protests which were consolidated for trial, relates to merchandise described in the consular invoices as “Silico Manganese Bar Reinforcement for Prestressed Concrete,” being 1 inch in diameter by 37 feet, 7 inches in length. The number of bars in each invoice is accompanied by an equal number of “sets” of nuts and washers. The bars are also referred to in the record in more abbreviated form as “Macalloy bars.”

*61The collector of customs apparently treated the bars, nuts, and washers as entireties and classified them as articles of metal upon…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Henry L. Exstein Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  2. Wm. Dixon, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Simon v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  2. United Merchandising Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  3. Humphrey & MacGregor, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  4. Preload Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  5. Western Pacific Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API