Protest 933139-G of Keene

1 Cust. Ct. 491
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedNovember 17, 1938
DocketNo. 39884
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Cust. Ct. 491 (Protest 933139-G of Keene) 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 933139-G of Keene, 1 Cust. Ct. 491 (cusc 1938).

Opinion

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It appeared that the bales in which the goods were packed were marked “Seotl’d” and that the rags themselves are not capable of being marked. It was found that this marking suggests Scotland to all and that it does something more than hint at the name of the acceptable marking prescribed in the customs regulations. Lorillard v. United States (24 C. C. P. A. 90, T. D. 48412), Abstracts 37656, 38243, 36598, T. D. 47007, American Burtonizing Co. v. United States (13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 652, T. D. 41489), and Vandegrift v. United States (id. 328, T. D. 41235) cited. The protest was therefore sustained^

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

Related

American Burtonizing Co. v. United States
13 Ct. Cust. 652 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Cust. Ct. 491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protest-933139-g-of-keene-cusc-1938.