Protests 896559-G of Friedlaender & Co.

U.S. Customs Court

Protests 896559-G of Friedlaender & Co.

11 Cust. Ct. 257

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedSeptember 9, 1943

DocketNo. 48746

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 Cust. Ct. 257 (Protests 896559-G of Friedlaender & 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

Protests 896559-G of Friedlaender & Co., 11 Cust. Ct. 257 (cusc 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Before these cases were heard on rehearing counsel for both parties agreed upon a stipulation of fact affecting certain items. New and material evidence was introduced as to some of the exhibits. It was conceded that certain of the items now in question consist of table articles composed of pressed glass, unpolished and not ground for purposes other than ornamentation, and that others consist of articles composed of pressed glass, unpolished and not ground. These items, as set out in this decision, were therefore held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 218(g) as claimed. As to all other items enumerated in the decision, the plaintiff failing to prove that they were not polished and/or not ground, the protests were overruled.

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

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Before these cases were heard on rehearing counsel for both parties agreed upon a stipulation of fact affecting certain items. New and material evidence was introduced as to some of the exhibits. It was conceded that certain of the items now in question consist of table articles composed of pressed glass, unpolished and not ground for purposes other than ornamentation, and that others consist of articles composed of pressed glass, unpolished and not ground. These items, as set out in this decision, were therefore held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 218(g) as claimed. As to all other items enumerated in the decision, the plaintiff failing to prove that they were not polished and/or not ground, the protests were overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Cust. Ct. 257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protests-896559-g-of-friedlaender-co-cusc-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack