Protest 113120-K of Browne Vintners Co.
This text of 15 Cust. Ct. 279 (Protest 113120-K of Browne Vintners Co.) 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.
Opinion
Opinon by
At the trial plaintiff’s witness testified that the case of whisky in question was missing from the shipment, it never having been received,, and that a claim for loss was made against the insurance company. Counsel for the plaintiff stated that the affidavit of shortage, as required under article 812, Customs Regulations of 1937, was not filed within the time prescribed. Government counsel admitted that an investigation showed the case of whisky was not imported. In view of the evidence, judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff, and the collector was directed to make refund of duties taken upon the one ease of whisky in question.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
15 Cust. Ct. 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protest-113120-k-of-browne-vintners-co-cusc-1945.