Legal Opinion

Lippincott Co. v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided March 1, 1921No. 2048PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 43695.

1Opinion of the CourtDe Yries, Judge

This appeal concerns the wantage, or nonshipment, of stuffed olives imported in barrels. The importations were made at the port of Cincinnati by I. T. entries. The merchandise was assessed for duty by the collector thereat upon the quantities returned by the official gauger in each instance. That there is a wantage in all such cases entitling the importer to an appropriate- reduction in duties is attested by the Treasury Regulations (T. D. 23742), reading:

Treasury Department,

May 26, 1902.

Collector of Customs, New York, N. Y.

Sir: With a view of securing uniformity between the several ports in…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Lawder v. StoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  2. United States v. ShallusCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
  3. Walden v. Bodley's HeirsSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
  4. United States v. HabichtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1910
  5. Houlder v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Border Brokerage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
  2. N. M. Albbet & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956
  3. Socony Vacuum Oil Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
  4. Protest 618980-G of Moscahlades Bros., Inc.United States Customs Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API