United States v. Walter

40 Cust. Ct. 852
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedJune 5, 1958
DocketReap. Dec. 9166; Entry No. 15017
StatusPublished

This text of 40 Cust. Ct. 852 (United States v. Walter) 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. Walter, 40 Cust. Ct. 852 (cusc 1958).

Opinion

Wilson, Judge:

This is a collector’s appeal for reappraisement involving the value, for duty purposes, of certain furniture articles exported from Hong Kong and entered at the port of San Francisco. The merchandise was appraised at invoiced unit values, less 15.818 per centum.

At the trial, the following stipulation was entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

Mb. FitzGibbon: * * *
# # ‡ # # #
We offer to stipulate with the attorney for the defendant that the items marked “A” on the invoice are dutiable for or are valued for duty purposes at the invoice value, less 24.53%, and that the articles marked “B” on the invoice should be valued for duty purposes at the invoice values, less 3.54%, and that the items marked “C” and “D” on the invoice, should be valued at the invoice value, less 10.13 per centum ad valorem.
.Mb. Tuttle: We agree.
[853]*853MR. FitzGibbon: Tbe case is submitted upon that stipulation of fact. I believe briefs aren’t necessary.
Judge Wilson: Case is ordered submitted on the stipulation * * *.

On the agreed facts, I find that the proper value of the items marked “A” on the invoice is the invoice value, less 24.53 per centum in each case; that the proper value of the items marked “B” on the invoice is the invoice value, less 3.54 per centum in each case; and that the proper value of the items marked “C” and “D” on the invoice is the invoice value, less 10.13 per centum in each case.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
40 Cust. Ct. 852, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-walter-cusc-1958.