Associated Metals & Minerals Corp. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Associated Metals & Minerals Corp. v. United States

28 Cust. Ct. 345, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 761

United States Customs Court·Decided December 18, 1951·No. No. 56174; protest 170516-K (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

When the case was called for trial, the only evidence offered was an amended report of the United States Customs Laboratory, which was received in evidence as exhibit 1. It was conceded by counsel for the Government that the original laboratory report stating that the merchandise consisted of “needle antimony,” and which was the basis of the collector’s action, is erroneous. Upon the record presented, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

When the case was called for trial, the only evidence offered was an amended report of the United States Customs Laboratory, which was received in evidence as exhibit 1. It was conceded by counsel for the Government that the original laboratory report stating that the merchandise consisted of “needle antimony,” and which was the basis of the collector’s action, is erroneous. Upon the record presented, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

Associated Metals & Minerals Corp. v. United States, 28 Cust. Ct. 345, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 761 (cusc 1951).

Pincite

28 Cust. Ct. 345 (Associated Metals & Minerals Corp. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.