R. U. Delapenha & Co. v. United States
This text of 42 Cust. Ct. 269 (R. U. Delapenha & Co. v. United States) 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.
Opinion
Opinion by
An examination of the collector’s report, received in evidence at the trial, shows that no allowance was made for duty or internal revenue tax for certain shortage, nor was an allowance made for duty to cover breakage, for the reason that the importer failed to file an affidavit of short shipment. Following United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C.C.P.A. 112, C.A.D. 351), United States v. R. C. Williams & Co., Inc. (40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc. v. United States (22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
42 Cust. Ct. 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/r-u-delapenha-co-v-united-states-cusc-1959.