Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States

20 Cust. Ct. 308, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 238

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 22 Cust. Ct. 33 →

United States Customs Court·Decided April 22, 1948·No. No. 52289; protest 126827-K/913 (Chicago)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in United States v. Somerset (33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination due to breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gauger's return as verified by the affidavit of the importer. The protest was sustained to this extent.

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

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in United States v. Somerset (33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination due to breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gauger's return as verified by the affidavit of the importer. The protest was sustained to this extent.

Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States, 20 Cust. Ct. 308, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 238 (cusc 1948).

Pincite

20 Cust. Ct. 308 (Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.