Dunnington & Arnold, Inc. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Dunnington & Arnold, Inc. v. United States

42 Cust. Ct. 372

United States Customs Court·Decided May 13, 1959·No. No. 63039; protest 327635-K (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise involved consists of a Mercedes Benz automobile imported as unaccompanied baggage for the account of a nonresident of the United States; that the collector assessed duty on said automobile for the reason that the record showing the arrival of the nonresident in the United States had not been located; that such record has now been established; and that the automobile is properly entitled to free entry, 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.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise involved consists of a Mercedes Benz automobile imported as unaccompanied baggage for the account of a nonresident of the United States; that the collector assessed duty on said automobile for the reason that the record showing the arrival of the nonresident in the United States had not been located; that such record has now been established; and that the automobile is properly entitled to free entry, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

Dunnington & Arnold, Inc. v. United States, 42 Cust. Ct. 372 (cusc 1959).

Pincite

42 Cust. Ct. 372 (Dunnington & Arnold, Inc. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.