Legal Opinion · Concurrence

D. C. Andrews & Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided March 5, 1963No. A.R.D. 151; Entry No. 717233, etcPublished

1Concurrence

CONCURRING OPINION

Donlon, Judge:

I concur in the result, but not for the same reasons as those which my colleagues have stated in the principal opinion.

I agree that sheer numbers of reports or affidavits, if they are merely repetitive, do not tip the scales in weighing evidence. Our problem here is not quite so simple as that.

I find that exhibit A (report of the consular officer at Frankfurt, West Germany, on his interview with Miss Hasenfuss) is defective as proof because it states what, under tariff law, is a legal conclusion, and fails utterly to show facts as to sales practices on which…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. Baar & Beards, Inc.United States Customs Court · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API