Miller v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Miller v. United States

32 Cust. Ct. 520, 1954 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2138

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 3, 1954

DocketNo. 58158; petition 7119-R (New York)

StatusPublished

This text of 32 Cust. Ct. 520 (Miller 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

Miller v. United States, 32 Cust. Ct. 520, 1954 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2138 (cusc 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial, it was established that the importer, the Ideal Toy Corp., had an agreement with the Government examiner that it would have an opportunity to amend entries upon musical movements; that the merchandise in question was purchased in the name of the president of the corporation, rather than in the corporate name; and that when the examiner was given all of the information which the importer had obtained from the shipper as to the value, the examiner sent notices to amend the other entries but not the entry in question, because he did not realize that this entry was part of the same shipments to the Ideal Toy Corp. From the evidence presented, it was held that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to mislead the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.

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

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial, it was established that the importer, the Ideal Toy Corp., had an agreement with the Government examiner that it would have an opportunity to amend entries upon musical movements; that the merchandise in question was purchased in the name of the president of the corporation, rather than in the corporate name; and that when the examiner was given all of the information which the importer had obtained from the shipper as to the value, the examiner sent notices to amend the other entries but not the entry in question, because he did not realize that this entry was part of the same shipments to the Ideal Toy Corp. From the evidence presented, it was held that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to mislead the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Cust. Ct. 520, 1954 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-united-states-cusc-1954.