General
Mamiye & Hidary v. United States
5 Cust. Ct. 550·United States Customs Court·1940
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
Mamiye & Hidary v. United States
No. 5025.
Invoices dated Shanghai, China, December 1, 1938, August 31, September 26, 1939.
Entered at New York January 13, October 6, November 15, 1939.
Entry Nos. 786076, 736313, 751435/1.
(Decided October 10, 1940)
Strauss & Hedges (Howard C. Carter of counsel) for the plaintiffs.
Charles D. Lawrence, Acting Assistant Attorney General (Daniel I. Auster, special attorney), for the defendant.
[MAJORITY — Tilson, Judge:]
Tilson, Judge:
The three appeals listed above have been submitted for decision upon a stipulation to the effect that at or about the date of exportation of the involved merchandise the market value or price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of China, for export to the United States, in usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, including all costs, charges, and expenses specified in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, was the appraised value, less any amounts added under duress.
On the agreed facts I find and hold the proper dutiable export values of the merchandise covered by said appeals to be the values found by the appraiser, less any amounts added under duress. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.