General
Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/8337-13425, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/12262-13573, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/15476-13679, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/17404-13801, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 64/1275-14098, etc. (Chicago); Dowst Manufacturing Company v. United States, protests 65/5752-14577 and 65/8656-14957 (Chicago)
59 Cust. Ct. 909·United States Customs Court·1967
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
Before the First Division,
November 27, 1967
No. P67/415.
No. P67/416.
No. P67/417.
No. P67/418.
No. P67/419.
Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/8337-13425, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/12262-13573, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/15476-13679, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/17404-13801, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 64/1275-14098, etc. (Chicago). Dowst Manufacturing Company v. United States, protests 65/5752-14577 and 65/8656-14957 (Chicago).
No. P67/420.
[MAJORITY — Eichardson, J.]
Eichardson, J.
In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of electric motors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Gamble Vargish & Co., dba Seabury & Co. v. United States (57 Cust. Ct. 448, C.D. 2834), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.