General
Reedy Forwarding Company, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/4505 and 63/6986 (Tampa); Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. United States, protests 63/6984 and 63/13947 (Tampa)
57 Cust. Ct. 812·United States Customs Court·1966
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. P66/240. —
No. P66/241. —
Reedy Forwarding Company, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/4505 and 63/6986 (Tampa). Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. United States, protests 63/6984 and 63/13947 (Tampa).
[MAJORITY — Rao, C.J.]
Rao, C.J.
In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of galvanized steel pipes or tubes not thinner than 0.065 inch, and not less than % inch in diameter, and that the issue involved herein is similar in all material respects to that in Amerlux Steel Products Corp. et al. v. United States (52 Cust. Ct. 83, C.D. 2441), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.