United States v. Taylor Milling Corp.

U.S. Customs Court

United States v. Taylor Milling Corp.

4 Cust. Ct. 841, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 4107

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedMay 9, 1940

DocketNo. 4902; Entry No. 02147

StatusPublished

This text of 4 Cust. Ct. 841 (United States v. Taylor Milling Corp.) 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

United States v. Taylor Milling Corp., 4 Cust. Ct. 841, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 4107 (cusc 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Cline, Judge:

This is an appeal for a reappraisement filed by the collector of customs at the port of Los Angeles. When the case was called for trial, counsel for the plaintiff explained that the appeal was filed because a charge for freight, amounting to $139.59, was deducted by the importer on entry and that the same amount for freight was also deducted on the invoice, so that the charge for freight was deducted twice. Counsel for the defendant agreed that there was a mistake in making the entry and that the second deduction for freight should not have been made on entry.

Accepting these statements as a stipulation by counsel, I appraise the merchandise at the invoice unit value, less nondutiable charges for shipping, freight, consular fee, and insurance premium. Judgment will be entered accordingly.

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

Cline, Judge:

This is an appeal for a reappraisement filed by the collector of customs at the port of Los Angeles. When the case was called for trial, counsel for the plaintiff explained that the appeal was filed because a charge for freight, amounting to $139.59, was deducted by the importer on entry and that the same amount for freight was also deducted on the invoice, so that the charge for freight was deducted twice. Counsel for the defendant agreed that there was a mistake in making the entry and that the second deduction for freight should not have been made on entry.

Accepting these statements as a stipulation by counsel, I appraise the merchandise at the invoice unit value, less nondutiable charges for shipping, freight, consular fee, and insurance premium. Judgment will be entered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Cust. Ct. 841, 1940 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 4107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-taylor-milling-corp-cusc-1940.