Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 1989

Belfont Sales Corporation v. The United States

Belfont Sales Corporation v. The United States
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Decided May 23, 1989 · Markey, Newman, Archer
878 F.2d 1413; 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 7104; 1989 WL 54299 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Steven R. Sosnov, Sosnov & Associates, Norristown, Pa., argued for plaintiff-appel-lee., James A. Curley, Commercial Litigation Branch, Dept. of Justice, New York City, argued for defendant-appellant. With him on the brief were John R. Bolton, Asst. Atty. Gen., David M. Cohen, Director and Joseph I. Liebman, Atty. in Charge, Intern. Trade Field Office. Also on the brief was Edward N. Maurer, U.S. Customs Service, of counsel.

Belfont Sales Corporation v. The United States

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

The United States appeals the decision of the United States Court of International Trade holding that battery-operated quartz analog watches are classified, and dutiable as an entirety, under item 688.45 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States. Belfont Sales Corp. v. United States, 666 F.Supp. 1568 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1987), reh’g denied, 698 F.Supp. 916 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1988). The decision of the Court of International Trade is affirmed, for the reasons stated in that court’s published opinion.

AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.