How-Tex Peanut Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Motions denied by order of Donlon, J; Bichardson, J., concurring.
Donlon, Judge:
Defendant has made identical motions to dismiss these two protests for alleged failure to apprise the collector of the reasons for protest, citing the enabling protest statute, section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and J. R. Press Corporation v. United States, 45 Cust. Ct. 382, Abstract 64924, and National Carloading Corporation v. United States, 44 Cust. Ct. 493, Abstract 64258.
Plaintiff opposes the motions. In separate memoranda for each protest, substantially identical, plaintiff argues that (1) the protests…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Arthur v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Geo. S. Bush & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1949
- Schell's Executors v. FauchéSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Greely's Administrator v. BurgessSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Herrman v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Continental Ore Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
- Pantoja v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1979
- Seibert v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970