Inlander-Steindler Paper Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Inlander-Steindler Paper Co. v. United States

50 Cust. Ct. 304, 1963 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3783

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedMay 15, 1963

DocketNo. 67727; protests 62/3947-14440, etc. (New Orleans)

StatusPublished

This text of 50 Cust. Ct. 304 (Inlander-Steindler Paper 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

Inlander-Steindler Paper Co. v. United States, 50 Cust. Ct. 304, 1963 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3783 (cusc 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Richardson, Judge:

When these protests were called for trial, defendant’s counsel moved to dismiss them upon the ground that the issue before the court was previously decided. Plaintiff’s counsel stated “I have no defense.” Appeals to reappraisement raising the same issue as is involved in the instant protests, and embracing the same entries which are now before the court, were dismissed on June 7, 1961, as having been untimely filed. (See Ensenat and Cie., Inc., et al. v. United States, 46 Cust. Ct. 701, Reap. Dec. 10015.) No appeal was taken from such judgment of dismissal by the plaintiff who was one of the parties affected thereby.

Upon the basis of the judgment of dismissal in Ensenat and Cie., Inc., et al. v. United States, supra, and the representation of plaintiff’s counsel that he had no defense, we hold that the issue raised in the instant protests is res judicata. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the instant protests is, therefore, granted.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.

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

Richardson, Judge:

When these protests were called for trial, defendant’s counsel moved to dismiss them upon the ground that the issue before the court was previously decided. Plaintiff’s counsel stated “I have no defense.” Appeals to reappraisement raising the same issue as is involved in the instant protests, and embracing the same entries which are now before the court, were dismissed on June 7, 1961, as having been untimely filed. (See Ensenat and Cie., Inc., et al. v. United States, 46 Cust. Ct. 701, Reap. Dec. 10015.) No appeal was taken from such judgment of dismissal by the plaintiff who was one of the parties affected thereby.

Upon the basis of the judgment of dismissal in Ensenat and Cie., Inc., et al. v. United States, supra, and the representation of plaintiff’s counsel that he had no defense, we hold that the issue raised in the instant protests is res judicata. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the instant protests is, therefore, granted.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 Cust. Ct. 304, 1963 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3783, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/inlander-steindler-paper-co-v-united-states-cusc-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack