Volkart Bros. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Volkart Bros. v. United States

22 Cust. Ct. 250, 1949 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1367

United States Customs Court·Decided March 2, 1949·No. No. 52905; protests 131834-K, etc. (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the issues and facts herein are similar to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that the quantity of cotton reported by the inspector as “not found,” and the three bundles of coco mats reported by the inspector as “manifested, not found,” are subject to an allowance in duty as claimed. The protests were sustained to this extent.

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 stipulated that the issues and facts herein are similar to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that the quantity of cotton reported by the inspector as “not found,” and the three bundles of coco mats reported by the inspector as “manifested, not found,” are subject to an allowance in duty as claimed. The protests were sustained to this extent.

Volkart Bros. v. United States, 22 Cust. Ct. 250, 1949 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1367 (cusc 1949).

Pincite

22 Cust. Ct. 250 (Volkart Bros. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.