Protests 958179-G of American Import Co.

U.S. Customs Court

Protests 958179-G of American Import Co.

11 Cust. Ct. 220

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJuly 17, 1943

DocketNo. 48567

StatusPublished

This text of 11 Cust. Ct. 220 (Protests 958179-G of American Import 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 958179-G of American Import Co., 11 Cust. Ct. 220 (cusc 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

A sample tapestry 19 by 39 inches was received in evidence as representative of the weave of all of the merchandise, the only -difference being in color and design. The testimony of th& only witness, a representative of the plaintiff company, was found to be very meager. He stated, however, that the tapestries are used for wall decorations or wall hangings in homes, never as rugs, and that while he has seen them used on end tables and foyer tables, they are principally used on walls. The testimony was held insufficient to support the claims made. On the authority of Rogers v. United States (T. D. 46174), affirmed in 21 C. C. P. A. 560, T. D. 46989, Weil v. United States (T. D. 46120), and Bing v. United States (3 Ct. Cust. Appls. 115, T. D. 32365) the protests were overruled. Noble v. United States (T. D. 48650) noted.

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

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

A sample tapestry 19 by 39 inches was received in evidence as representative of the weave of all of the merchandise, the only -difference being in color and design. The testimony of th& only witness, a representative of the plaintiff company, was found to be very meager. He stated, however, that the tapestries are used for wall decorations or wall hangings in homes, never as rugs, and that while he has seen them used on end tables and foyer tables, they are principally used on walls. The testimony was held insufficient to support the claims made. On the authority of Rogers v. United States (T. D. 46174), affirmed in 21 C. C. P. A. 560, T. D. 46989, Weil v. United States (T. D. 46120), and Bing v. United States (3 Ct. Cust. Appls. 115, T. D. 32365) the protests were overruled. Noble v. United States (T. D. 48650) noted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Cust. Ct. 220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/protests-958179-g-of-american-import-co-cusc-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack