Protest 77417-K of R. C. Williams & Co.

U.S. Customs Court

Protest 77417-K of R. C. Williams & Co.

12 Cust. Ct. 314

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedMay 17, 1944

DocketNo. 49415

StatusPublished

This text of 12 Cust. Ct. 314 (Protest 77417-K of R. C. Williams & 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.

Bluebook

Protest 77417-K of R. C. Williams & Co., 12 Cust. Ct. 314 (cusc 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial counsel for plaintiff stated that the issue involved was shortage, it being claimed that two cases of the merchandise were not landed and that no allowance therefor was made in liquidation. The import manager of the plaintiff testified that all but two cases wore received, and a report of the customs inspector, admitted in evidence, showed that the cases in question were not landed. Counsel for the Government moved to dismiss the protest on the ground that the “evidence has not borne out the protest,” as nothing was stated concerning a shortage, that the evidence produced does not sustain the contention that duty was taken upon too great a weight, and that consequently the protest should either be dismissed as insufficient or overruled for lack of proof. The court was of the opinion that in the circumstances arising in the case the protest is sufficient as to the weight claim, inasmuch as the importer might have established that duty was taken upon the basis of too great a weight. However, counsel for plaintiff failed to introduce evidence to that end but attempted to establish that two cases were short-shipped. In respect to proof as to shortage, inasmuch as there is no claim made in the protest that the packages in question were not landed, the court said that evidence will not be considered. Therefore, the net landed weights reported by the Government weigher not having been controverted, judgment was entered in favor of the defendant.

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

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial counsel for plaintiff stated that the issue involved was shortage, it being claimed that two cases of the merchandise were not landed and that no allowance therefor was made in liquidation. The import manager of the plaintiff testified that all but two cases wore received, and a report of the customs inspector, admitted in evidence, showed that the cases in question were not landed. Counsel for the Government moved to dismiss the protest on the ground that the “evidence has not borne out the protest,” as nothing was stated concerning a shortage, that the evidence produced does not sustain the contention that duty was taken upon too great a weight, and that consequently the protest should either be dismissed as insufficient or overruled for lack of proof. The court was of the opinion that in the circumstances arising in the case the protest is sufficient as to the weight claim, inasmuch as the importer might have established that duty was taken upon the basis of too great a weight. However, counsel for plaintiff failed to introduce evidence to that end but attempted to establish that two cases were short-shipped. In respect to proof as to shortage, inasmuch as there is no claim made in the protest that the packages in question were not landed, the court said that evidence will not be considered. Therefore, the net landed weights reported by the Government weigher not having been controverted, judgment was entered in favor of the defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 Cust. Ct. 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protest-77417-k-of-r-c-williams-co-cusc-1944.