Legal Opinion · Dissent

Pistorino & Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided October 12, 1971No. C.D. 4281Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION

EichaRdson, Judge:

Because of the present posture of this case, it is necessary to express my views in three parts. Part I is addressed to the affect on a motion for rehearing when a court consisting of a plurality of judges is equally divided on the disposition of the motion. *252Part II is addressed to Judge Landis’ reconsideration of our decision that the liquidation was premature and void. Part III is addressed to Judge Landis’ reconsideration of our decision that the effect of the premature liquidation was to void the apraisement, and our remand of the case to a single judge…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. John V. Carr & Son, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
  2. New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  3. Ti Hang Lung & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1939
  4. Pistorino & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  5. Garod Radio Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961

2 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