General
Arkwright Merchandising Corp. et al. v. United States
17 Cust. Ct. 312·United States Customs Court·1946
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Arkwright Merchandising Corp. et al. v. United States
No. 6363.
Entry No. 700877, etc.
Invoices dated London, England, May 1943, etc.
Certified June 1943, etc.
Entered at New York, N. Y., July 12, 1943, etc.
(Decided September 19, 1946)
Siegel, Mandell & Davidson (Sidney Mandell of counsel) for the plaintiffs.
Paul P. Rao, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.
[MAJORITY — Keefe, Judge:]
Keefe, Judge:
The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:
(Stipulation omitted.)
On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the earthenware and chinaware here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases. Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.
Judgment will be rendered accordingly.