Legal Opinion

Burgess Battery Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided July 6, 1944No. C. D. 866PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Keefe, Judge:

The merchandise involved here consists of scraps zinc imported from Canada and was classified as “old and worn-out zinc, fit only to be remanufactured” under paragraph 394 of the Tariff' Act of 1930 at 1% cents per pound. The importer claims that the merchandise is entitled to free entry as American goods returned under-the provisions of paragraph 1615, as amended. An agreed statement of fact was entered into as to the merchandise covered by each of the-protests and each of the entries therein. In order to not unduly extend the opinion we quote the stipulation below as filed with…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. BirdCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
  2. United States v. Tower & SonsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919
  3. United States v. Rubelli's SonsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  4. United States v. SaundersCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1917
  5. South Porto Rico Sugar Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1939

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Precision Specialty Metals, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2000
  2. Air Carrier Supply Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955
  3. Import-Export Service v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
  4. Humphreys v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955

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

Powered by the Exa API