U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 1991

Chrysler Motors Corp. v. United States

Chrysler Motors Corp. v. United States
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Decided October 8, 1991 · Newman, Nies, Rader
945 F.2d 1187; 1991 WL 199409 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Joseph S. Kaplan, Ross & Hardies, New York City, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was Michelle F. Forte, of counsel., Joseph I. Liebman, Atty. in Charge, Intern. Trade Field Office, Commercial Litigation Branch, Dept, of Justice, of New York, New York City, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were Stuart M. Gerson, Asst. Atty. Gen. and David M. Cohen, Director. Also on the brief was Edward N. Maurer, U.S. Customs Service, of counsel., Barton C. Green, Sr. Vice President, Gen. Counsel, Secretary & Treasurer, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., represented amicus curiae, American Iron and Steel Institute. Alexander W. Sierck, Beveridge & Diamond, P.C., Washington, D.C., represented amicus curiae, Automotive Parts and Accessories Ass’n and American Iron and Steel Institute.

Chrysler Motors Corp. v. United States

Cases that cite this one

2 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 of the Court

PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

Chrysler Motors Corporation appeals the decision of the Court of International Trade1 denying drawback for duty paid on certain merchandise transferred by Chrysler to a foreign-trade zone, the court holding that the merchandise is not considered exported on the facts that pertain. On the opinion of the Court of International Trade, which we adopt, the decision is

AFFIRMED.

. Chrysler Motors Corporation v. United States, 755 F.Supp. 388 (Ct.Int’l Trade 1990).

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