Protest 46648-K of Beggs Bros.

U.S. Customs Court

Protest 46648-K of Beggs Bros.

6 Cust. Ct. 670

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 5, 1941

DocketNo. 46016

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Cust. Ct. 670 (Protest 46648-K of Beggs Bros.) 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 46648-K of Beggs Bros., 6 Cust. Ct. 670 (cusc 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

The importer testified that upon the voyage the goods became watersoaked, which accounted for the increased weight, and further

[671]*671that only 25 percent of the importation was suitable for use and that 75 percent had been thrown away as refuse. The importer failed to make any claim covering the merchandise destroyed, limiting the protest to a claim of excessive moisture.As it was not proven that the merchandise contained excessive moisture, the court was constrained to overrule the protest. Reeves v. United States (1 Cust. Ct. 7, C. D. 3) cited.

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

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

The importer testified that upon the voyage the goods became watersoaked, which accounted for the increased weight, and further

[671]*671that only 25 percent of the importation was suitable for use and that 75 percent had been thrown away as refuse. The importer failed to make any claim covering the merchandise destroyed, limiting the protest to a claim of excessive moisture.As it was not proven that the merchandise contained excessive moisture, the court was constrained to overrule the protest. Reeves v. United States (1 Cust. Ct. 7, C. D. 3) cited.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Cust. Ct. 670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protest-46648-k-of-beggs-bros-cusc-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack