Case: Chase, Leavitt & Co. v. United States
Abbreviation: Chase, Leavitt & Co. v. United States
Decision Date: 1940-12-26
Docket Number: No. 5075; Entry No. 46
Citation: 6 Cust. Ct. 699
Volume: 6
Reporter: United States Customs Court Reports
Court: United States Customs Court
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Chase, Leavitt & Co. v. United States
Judges: Before Cline and Walker, Judges
Pages: 699–700

Head Matter:
Chase, Leavitt & Co. v. United States
No. 5075.
Invoice dated Tiverton, N. S., October 28, 1939.
Entered at Portland, Maine, November 3, 1939.
Entry No. 46.
Third Division, Appellate Term
(Decided December 26, 1940)
No appearance for appellants.
Charles D. Lawrence, Acting Assistant Attorney General (Daniel I. Auster, special attorney), for the appellee.
Before Cline and Walker, Judges

Opinion:
Cline, Judge:
This is an application for review of the decision of the trial court published in Reap. Dec. 4972. The trial court appraised a motorboat at the value found by the appraiser.
At the argument before this division, counsel for the Government stated that after the application for review was filed he caused an investigation to be made from which he ascertained that the actual price of the motorboat was $250, United States currency, and that such price was the foreign and the export value. He asked that, since $250 United States currency was the entered value, the case be remanded to the trial court for further consideration. Also he read into the record a letter from the customs broker who made the entry and filed the appeal for reappraisement consenting to such disposition of the case.
As section 501 of the Tariff Act of 1930 provides that upon an application for review of a decision of the trial court, the appellate division "shall consider the case upon the samples of the merchandise, if there be any, and the record made before the single judge," it is obvious that any addition to the record or consent or stipulation of the parties should be made before the trial judge. In order that justice may be judicially administered in this case, therefore, the case is remanded to the trial judge for a new trial.