Protests 85237-K of T. Dragani & Co.

9 Cust. Ct. 384
United States Customs Court·Decided July 20, 1942·No. No. 47403·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

These protests were submitted upon a stipulation entered into between counsel. In view of this agreement and following Pistorino v. United States (2 Cust. Ct. 222, C. D. 127), Union Importing Co. v. United States (id. 911, Reap. Dec. 4558), and Dragani v. United States (id. 999, Reap. Dec. 4592) cited therein, the claim that the appraisements were illegal and that the liquidations based on“such appraisements were also illegal and void was sustained. It was therefore held that duty should be assessed upon the entered value.

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

Protests 85237-K of T. Dragani & Co., 9 Cust. Ct. 384 (cusc 1942).

9 Cust. Ct. 384 (Protests 85237-K of T. Dragani & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pistorino & Co. v. United States
2 Cust. Ct. 222 (U.S. Customs Court, 1939)