Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc. v. United States

39 Cust. Ct. 472
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 41 Cust. Ct. 11
United States Customs Court·Decided October 30, 1957·No. No. 61300; protest 267097-K (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The issue presented herein was decided adversely to plaintiff’s contention in Dale Products Corp. et al. v. United States (31 Cust. Ct. 170, C. D. 1565) and United States v. Astra Trading Corp. (44 C. C. P. A. 8, C. A. D. 627). When the case was called for trial, plaintiff requested a continuance pending trial of a new test ease. The request was denied and an order of dismissal for lack of prosecution was entered. The protest was, therefore, dismissed.

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

Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc. v. United States, 39 Cust. Ct. 472 (cusc 1957).

39 Cust. Ct. 472 (Hensel, Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dale Products Corp. v. United States
31 Cust. Ct. 170 (U.S. Customs Court, 1953)