Collin v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Collin v. United States

5 Cust. Ct. 486, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3197

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJuly 9, 1940

DocketNo. 4971; Entry No. 891-H

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Cust. Ct. 486 (Collin v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Collin v. United States, 5 Cust. Ct. 486, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3197 (cusc 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Cline, Judge:

This is an appeal for a reappraisement of certain glass bottles imported from Kavalier Glass Works of Sazava, Czechoslovakia, the invoice being certified on February 6, 1935.

When the case was called for trial, counsel for the plaintiffs offered a letter from the shipper to which the defendant objected on the ground that section 501 of the Tariff Act of 1930 does not make such matter admissible in evidence. The objection was sustained and the letter was marked “Exhibit 1 for identification”. The case was then submitted without the introduction of evidence and counsel for the defendant moved to dismiss the appeal on the groimd that the appellants had failed to make out a prima facie case. The motion is granted as there is nothing in the record to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the appraisement. Judgment will be entered dismissing the appeal.

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

Cline, Judge:

This is an appeal for a reappraisement of certain glass bottles imported from Kavalier Glass Works of Sazava, Czechoslovakia, the invoice being certified on February 6, 1935.

When the case was called for trial, counsel for the plaintiffs offered a letter from the shipper to which the defendant objected on the ground that section 501 of the Tariff Act of 1930 does not make such matter admissible in evidence. The objection was sustained and the letter was marked “Exhibit 1 for identification”. The case was then submitted without the introduction of evidence and counsel for the defendant moved to dismiss the appeal on the groimd that the appellants had failed to make out a prima facie case. The motion is granted as there is nothing in the record to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the appraisement. Judgment will be entered dismissing the appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Cust. Ct. 486, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collin-v-united-states-cusc-1940.