Protest 42182-K of Wakefield

U.S. Customs Court

Protest 42182-K of Wakefield

9 Cust. Ct. 373

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1942

DocketNo. 47357

StatusPublished

This text of 9 Cust. Ct. 373 (Protest 42182-K of Wakefield) 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

Protest 42182-K of Wakefield, 9 Cust. Ct. 373 (cusc 1942).

Pincite

Opinions

C. D. 660.

ORDER

Upon reading the motion for a rehearing herein, together with the affidavit of Richard'E. -FitzGibbon, sworn to the 14th day of April, 1942, and the memorandum of Paul P. Rao, Assistant Attorney General in charge of Customs, attorney for the defendant, all in support thereof, and after reading the memorandum of Edwin R. Wakefield, Esquire, attorney for the plaintiff, in opposition thereto; it now appearing to the court that the plaintiff has failed to show by proper evidence that the rate of 35 percent ad valorem plus 8 cents per pound is less than 45 [374]*374percent ad valorem wh. en applied to the instant merchandise, and for the purpose of clarifying our origin al decision, and in the interest of. establishing a uniform classification for the instant merchandise, it is hereby

Okdbred that the motion for rehearing be, and the same is in all respects, granted.

Dated New York, N. Y., July 1, 1942.

William J. Tilson,

Fred’k W. Dallinger,

Judges of the United States Customs Court.

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

C. D. 660.

ORDER

Upon reading the motion for a rehearing herein, together with the affidavit of Richard'E. -FitzGibbon, sworn to the 14th day of April, 1942, and the memorandum of Paul P. Rao, Assistant Attorney General in charge of Customs, attorney for the defendant, all in support thereof, and after reading the memorandum of Edwin R. Wakefield, Esquire, attorney for the plaintiff, in opposition thereto; it now appearing to the court that the plaintiff has failed to show by proper evidence that the rate of 35 percent ad valorem plus 8 cents per pound is less than 45 [374]*374percent ad valorem wh. en applied to the instant merchandise, and for the purpose of clarifying our origin al decision, and in the interest of. establishing a uniform classification for the instant merchandise, it is hereby

Okdbred that the motion for rehearing be, and the same is in all respects, granted.

Dated New York, N. Y., July 1, 1942.

William J. Tilson,

Fred’k W. Dallinger,

Judges of the United States Customs Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Cust. Ct. 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protest-42182-k-of-wakefield-cusc-1942.