Old Delft Optical Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Old Delft Optical Co. v. United States

47 Cust. Ct. 365

United States Customs Court·Decided November 14, 1961·No. No. 66210; protest 60/18592 (New York)·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that no notice of appraisement was sent by the collector to the plaintiff and that the appraised value of the merchandise was higher than the entered value, the protest was dismissed, and the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U.S.C. § 2636(d)). United States v. James H. Rhodes & Co. (40 C.C.P.A. 1, C.A.D. 488), followed.

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

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that no notice of appraisement was sent by the collector to the plaintiff and that the appraised value of the merchandise was higher than the entered value, the protest was dismissed, and the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U.S.C. § 2636(d)). United States v. James H. Rhodes & Co. (40 C.C.P.A. 1, C.A.D. 488), followed.

Old Delft Optical Co. v. United States, 47 Cust. Ct. 365 (cusc 1961).

Pincite

47 Cust. Ct. 365 (Old Delft Optical Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related