DuPouey v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

DuPouey v. United States

25 Cust. Ct. 224, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 79

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 22, 1950

DocketNo. 54454; petition 6708-R (New Orleans)

StatusPublished

This text of 25 Cust. Ct. 224 (DuPouey 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

DuPouey v. United States, 25 Cust. Ct. 224, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 79 (cusc 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Cline, J.

At the trial the customs broker testified that she made the entry herein for Hambro Trading Co. on June 6, 1947; that on June 2 she filed a request for information from the appraiser who stated that he had no current information and that market value should be ascertained from the shipper; that subsequently an amended entry was filed on the basis of information given by the examiner; and that she understood that the figures given by the examiner included the packing charges, but when the examiner made his return, packing was added to the net value. On the record presented it was held that the petitioner acted without intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.

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

Opinion by

Cline, J.

At the trial the customs broker testified that she made the entry herein for Hambro Trading Co. on June 6, 1947; that on June 2 she filed a request for information from the appraiser who stated that he had no current information and that market value should be ascertained from the shipper; that subsequently an amended entry was filed on the basis of information given by the examiner; and that she understood that the figures given by the examiner included the packing charges, but when the examiner made his return, packing was added to the net value. On the record presented it was held that the petitioner acted without intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 Cust. Ct. 224, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dupouey-v-united-states-cusc-1950.