Fuld & Co. v. United States
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers. The decision below affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York. The question involved is whether the importers’ protest sufficiently complied with the provisions of Customs Administrative Act June 10, 1890, c. 407, § 14, 26 Stat. 137 [U. S. Comp.
Read the full summary
On Application for Review of a Decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers. The decision below affirmed the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the port of New York. The question involved is whether the importers’ protest sufficiently complied with the provisions of Customs Administrative Act June 10, 1890, c. 407, § 14, 26 Stat. 137 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1933], which requires that an importer, if dissatisfied with the assessment of duty, shall set forth in his protest “distinctly and specifically, and in respect to each entry or payment, the reasons for his…
1Opinion of the Court
HAZEL, District Judge.
The protest does not point out specifically and distinctly the proper rate of duty in respect to the different entries, and I am of opinion that the question of sufficiency of protest is controlled by U. S. v. Fleitmann (C. C. A.) 137 Fed. 476, and U. S. v. Bayersdofer, 126 Fed. 732, 62 C. C. A. 16. The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is sustained.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. H. Bayersdorfer & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1903
- United States v. FleitmannCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905