S. H. Pomerance Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

S. H. Pomerance Co. v. United States

26 Cust. Ct. 375, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 303

United States Customs Court·Decided March 6, 1951·No. No. 55311; protest 143454-K (A) (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

The evidence disclosed that the merchandise in case

No. 1520 was checked under the supervision of the president of the importing company when received and that only 212 dozen tweezers were found; that case No. 1521 was also checked and the quantity found therein was 288 dozen tweezers, as reported by the appraiser; and that in checking all of the tweezers in the two cases against the invoice, it was discovered that the total number of tweezers in the importation, i. e., 500 dozen, agreed with the invoice. On the record presented the claim of the plaintiff that duty was improperly assessed, upon an excess of 38 dozen tweezers was sustained.

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

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

The evidence disclosed that the merchandise in case

No. 1520 was checked under the supervision of the president of the importing company when received and that only 212 dozen tweezers were found; that case No. 1521 was also checked and the quantity found therein was 288 dozen tweezers, as reported by the appraiser; and that in checking all of the tweezers in the two cases against the invoice, it was discovered that the total number of tweezers in the importation, i. e., 500 dozen, agreed with the invoice. On the record presented the claim of the plaintiff that duty was improperly assessed, upon an excess of 38 dozen tweezers was sustained.

S. H. Pomerance Co. v. United States, 26 Cust. Ct. 375, 1951 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 303 (cusc 1951).

Pincite

26 Cust. Ct. 375 (S. H. Pomerance Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.