World Mart, Inc. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
.Newman, Judge:
Defendant’s motion for a more definite statement covering these 26 appeals for reappraisement will be denied without prejudice to a reconsideration thereof.1 In summary, plaintiff’s attorney of record has not been served with a copy of defendant’s motion, and. thus has had no opportunity to respond to the motion.
The complaints were signed in the following manner:
Cassel and Benjamin and Brian R. Hersh
By '_(Signature)_
Brian R. Hersh, Attorneys for Plaintiff
602 Biscayne Building, 19 W. Flagler St.
Miami, Florida 33130, Tel: 379-1641
The certificate of service attached to defendant’s…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- S. Stern & Company v. The United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- S. Stern, Henry & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
- R. G. Hobelmann & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- World Mart, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
3Cited by2 opinions
- Philip J. Bernstein Enterprises v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
- Cury v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1980