Bortolo Bendin, Inc. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Bortolo Bendin, Inc. v. United States

22 Cust. Ct. 219, 1949 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1253

United States Customs Court·Decided January 4, 1949·No. No. 52789; protests 137251-K and 137932-K (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation and following the decision cited it was held that the merchandise, insofar as it involves the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, is subject to an allowance in duties. The protests were sustained to this extent.

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

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation and following the decision cited it was held that the merchandise, insofar as it involves the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, is subject to an allowance in duties. The protests were sustained to this extent.

Bortolo Bendin, Inc. v. United States, 22 Cust. Ct. 219, 1949 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1253 (cusc 1949).

Pincite

22 Cust. Ct. 219 (Bortolo Bendin, Inc. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.