Case ID: cust-ct_39/html/0355-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Wilson, J. Mollison, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 61022.
    protest 936432-G (New York).
    China Man Way Fur Corp. v. United States,
   Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of kidskin plates the same in all material respects as those the subject of Prime Fur Corp. v. United States (37 Cust. Ct. 83, C. D. 1802) and that the items marked “B” consist of goatskins similar to those involved in United States v. Winograd Bros., Inc. (32 C. C. P. A. 153, C. A. D. 302), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

Mollison, J.,

dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1802, supra.