Hamilton Watch Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Hamilton Watch Co. v. United States

27 Cust. Ct. 259, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 861

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 20, 1951

DocketNo. 55690; protest 166869-K (Philadelphia)

StatusPublished

This text of 27 Cust. Ct. 259 (Hamilton Watch Co. 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

Hamilton Watch Co. v. United States, 27 Cust. Ct. 259, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 861 (cusc 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the appraisement of merchandise and the liquidation of the entries were made in the same manner, under facts and circumstances the same in all material respects,’ as the appraisement and liquidation in The Gruen Watch Company v. United States (24 Cust. Ct. 101, C. D. 1216). In accordance with stipulation and following the cited authority the claim of the plaintiff was sustained. It was further held that a legal liquidation should be had which would form the basis for a protest in which, should it so desire, the importer may litigate any questions presented by such action under section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.

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

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the appraisement of merchandise and the liquidation of the entries were made in the same manner, under facts and circumstances the same in all material respects,’ as the appraisement and liquidation in The Gruen Watch Company v. United States (24 Cust. Ct. 101, C. D. 1216). In accordance with stipulation and following the cited authority the claim of the plaintiff was sustained. It was further held that a legal liquidation should be had which would form the basis for a protest in which, should it so desire, the importer may litigate any questions presented by such action under section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 Cust. Ct. 259, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-watch-co-v-united-states-cusc-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack