McIntyre v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

McIntyre v. United States

37 Cust. Ct. 429

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedNovember 29, 1956

DocketNo. 60387; protest 240654-K (New York)

StatusPublished

This text of 37 Cust. Ct. 429 (McIntyre 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

McIntyre v. United States, 37 Cust. Ct. 429 (cusc 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Each of the drums bore one of six symbols or markings, and representative samples of each of the six groups were subjected to examination in the customs laboratory. The samples marked DS 3, DS 5, and DS 28 were found to contain more than 2 percent of free fatty acids, while those marked DS 26, DS 27, and DS 29 were found to contain 2 percent or less of free fatty acids. When the protest was called for trial, Government counsel stated that he had discussed the matter with the examiner and with the protest reviewer in the collector’s office, and they each stated that, if the matter were before them now, they would suggest classification according to the importer’s protest. On the [430]*430record presented, the claim in the protest was sustained as to the merchandise identified on the invoice by the markings DS 3, DS 5, and DS 28.

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

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Each of the drums bore one of six symbols or markings, and representative samples of each of the six groups were subjected to examination in the customs laboratory. The samples marked DS 3, DS 5, and DS 28 were found to contain more than 2 percent of free fatty acids, while those marked DS 26, DS 27, and DS 29 were found to contain 2 percent or less of free fatty acids. When the protest was called for trial, Government counsel stated that he had discussed the matter with the examiner and with the protest reviewer in the collector’s office, and they each stated that, if the matter were before them now, they would suggest classification according to the importer’s protest. On the [430]*430record presented, the claim in the protest was sustained as to the merchandise identified on the invoice by the markings DS 3, DS 5, and DS 28.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 Cust. Ct. 429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcintyre-v-united-states-cusc-1956.