Legal Opinion

Burgess Battery Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided August 15, 1947No. C. D. 1063PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lawrence, Judge:

Tbe Burgess Battery Co., a Delaware corporation, which operates a plant at Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, shipped to its United States plant at Freeport, Ill., coded zinc measuring 7% inches wide, 0.070 of 1 inch thick, and approximately 40 feet long. It was imported in coil form merely to effect economy in transportation.

*29The question submitted for our determination-is whether the imported merchandise is “zinc in sheets” within the meaning of the tariff act. Duty was levied thereon at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem under the provision in paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Meyer v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
  2. United States v. SchadeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  3. Bakelite Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
  4. United States v. WalterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
  5. Hamfton v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Burstrom v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956
  2. Pheoll Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
  3. Sommers Plastic Products Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  4. Atwood Vacuum Machine Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  5. Dorf International, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962

3 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