Igstaedter & Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBland, Judge
The appellants, importers, entered for duty one case of cotton piece goods, consisting of 77 pieces of 4,678f yards at 1.80 francs, which was sent to the appraiser’s warehouse for examination. The invoice sets out the above quantity and unit price and extends the same to francs 9,220.85, which is admittedly arithmetically incorrect.
Attached to the invoice is the usual form "Summary of entered value, examination and appraisement.” In the. "Appraised” column appears the check mark [v] and date "12/6/20,” and the examiner’s initials in red ink. The summary sheet is stamped "Approved, Dec. 6,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Arthur v. UnkartSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Walden v. Bodley's HeirsSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Wolff v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- United States v. Frank & LambertCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- United States v. Kuttroff, Pickhardt & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- United States v. Gothic Watch Co.United States Customs Court · 1949
- Concord Electronics Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1972
- Thalson Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
- Balfour v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
- Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.