Daniel F. Young, Inc. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Daniel F. Young, Inc. v. United States

38 Cust. Ct. 397

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Daniel F. Young, Inc. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 40 Cust. Ct. 860 →

United States Customs Court·Decided January 11, 1957·No. No. 60444; protest 230129-K (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that if the certificate of exportation had been filed prior to the liquidation of the entry or the expiration of the collector’s review period provided for in section 515, the merchandise would have been liquidated free of duty under paragraph 1615, as amended, supra. In view of the stipulation and following Abstract 53865, 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

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that if the certificate of exportation had been filed prior to the liquidation of the entry or the expiration of the collector’s review period provided for in section 515, the merchandise would have been liquidated free of duty under paragraph 1615, as amended, supra. In view of the stipulation and following Abstract 53865, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

Daniel F. Young, Inc. v. United States, 38 Cust. Ct. 397 (cusc 1957).

Pincite

38 Cust. Ct. 397 (Daniel F. Young, Inc. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.