Home/U.S. Customs Court/Holmes v. United States

Holmes v. United States

36 Cust. Ct. 395
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Holmes v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 37 Cust. Ct. 260 →
United States Customs Court·Decided April 5, 1956·No. No. 59829; protest 224980-K (Seattle)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of veal similar in all material respects to that the subject of Swift & Company et al. v. United States (33 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 1655), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

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

Holmes v. United States, 36 Cust. Ct. 395 (cusc 1956).

36 Cust. Ct. 395 (Holmes v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Swift & Co. v. United States
33 Cust. Ct. 212 (U.S. Customs Court, 1954)