Legal Opinion

Byrnes v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided February 13, 1963No. Reap. Dec. 10451; Entry No. 6520, etcPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Donlon, Judge:

The merchandise at issue is fishhooks, exported from England, which were entered at Seattle at various times between March 3, 1958, and December 17, 1959. Four suits for reap-praisement of the merchandise have been consolidated for purposes of trial.

There is no serious controversy as to facts. Proofs of record include the official papers; a stipulation which was entered into on trial; the affidavit (introduced by plaintiff) of one David J. Sealey, identified as the sales director in Eedditch, England, of Edgar Sealey & Sons, Ltd., manufacturer of the merchandise, which affidavit…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. Alfred Kohlberg, Inc.United States Customs Court · 1939
  2. Acme Steel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  3. United States v. Tiffany & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1920
  4. Walter v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1950

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Haddad & Sons, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. United States v. F. W. Myers & Co.United States Customs Court · 1969
  3. United States v. ByrnesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  4. Luckytex, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  5. Pan American Import Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967

6 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