Rigley v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Rigley v. United States

29 Cust. Ct. 339, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1456

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 26, 1952

DocketNo. 56776; protest 171439-K (Los Angeles)

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Cust. Ct. 339 (Rigley 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.

Bluebook

Rigley v. United States, 29 Cust. Ct. 339, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1456 (cusc 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was established that when the husband of the plaintiff returned to the United States, he filed a baggage declaration in accordance with paragraph 1798, as amended, and section 10.17 (k), Customs Regulations of 1943, as amended by T. D. 52482, and was allowed by the collector to include therein the original rugs in question. In view of the fact that the baggage declaration was amended to include the oriental rugs in question under paragraph 1798, supra, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

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

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was established that when the husband of the plaintiff returned to the United States, he filed a baggage declaration in accordance with paragraph 1798, as amended, and section 10.17 (k), Customs Regulations of 1943, as amended by T. D. 52482, and was allowed by the collector to include therein the original rugs in question. In view of the fact that the baggage declaration was amended to include the oriental rugs in question under paragraph 1798, supra, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Cust. Ct. 339, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rigley-v-united-states-cusc-1952.