Legal Opinion
The United States v. Chas. Kurz Co.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 27, 1968No. Customs Appeal 5291PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WORLEY, Chief Judge.
Rule 5(b) of the Rules of the United States Customs Court reads:
Whenever it shall be made to appear to a division of this court or a judge before whom a cause, action, or proceeding is pending that the same is not being prosecuted with due diligence, the court may, either upon its own motion or upon the motion of any interested party, enter an order dismissing the said cause, action, or proceeding for lack of prosecution. [Emphasis supplied.]
The sole issue here is whether the trial judge’s dismissal of the importer’s protest for lack of prosecution was proper or, as the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Hicks v. Bekins Moving & Storage Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
- Bobby Jean McKissick v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967
- Sweeney v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1942
- Colorado Eastern Ry. Co. v. Union Pac. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1899
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Quigley & Manard, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
- Raymond Sheaffer v. Warehouse Employees Union, Local No. 730, Etc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
- Reynolds Trading Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
- United States v. RubinsteinUnited States Court of International Trade · 1999
- Walker International Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.