Legal Opinion

Borgfeldt & Co. v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided January 22, 1923No. 2175PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, Presiding Judge

The issue in this case does not involve the classification of merchandise for duty, nor the rate of duty assessed thereon. It relates exclusively to alleged shortages in certain packages of goods when landed, for which a refund is claimed upon the ground of nonim-portation. The importers presented their claims in that behalf to the collector for allowance, but he rejected them. A protest was then filed and submitted to the board. This was overruled, and the importers have appealed.

It is elementary that duty does not accrue upon invoiced merchandise which in fact never arrives at port; and the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hull v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920
  2. United States v. ThomasCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912
  3. United States v. Borgfeldt & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1921

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Eidlitz & Son Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
  2. Joseph Dixon Crucible Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1945
  3. Dulien Steel Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955
  4. B. Altman & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1944
  5. Ungerer & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API