Legal Opinion

King v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided January 30, 1947No. C. D. 1041PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Olivbe, Presiding Judge:

When this case was called for trial, continuance until the next Laredo docket wa§ granted. Counsel for the Government then moved to dismiss the protest on the ground that it was untimely and was not signed by a proper party.

The merchandise involved is covered by entry 1524-B which was liquidated on September 27, 1945.

In support o'f the motion, Government counsel introduced as a witness the deputy collector of customs at Brownsville, Tex., who testified that on November 26, 1945, the sixtieth day after liquidation of the involved entry, he received a telephone call from…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Gallagher v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1910
  2. Navailles v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1938
  3. Knutsen v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1943
  4. Rhodes Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1941
  5. Lloyd v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1941

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Group Italglass U.S.A., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1993
  2. Point Four Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1977
  3. Wolf D. Barth Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1978
  4. King v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API