14 Ct. Cust. 133

Linck v. United States Kommel Co. v. United States Transatlantic Clock & Watch Co. (Inc.) v. United States Grebstein v. United States Angel & Co. (Inc.) v. United States1

(No. 2565). (No. 2566). (No. 2576). (No. 2577).

United States Court of Customs Appeals,

May 10, 1926

Brooks & Brooks (Frederick W. Brooks, jr., of counsel) for appellants.

Charles D. Lawrence, Assistant Attorney General (Reuben Wilson, Thomas J. Canty, John F. Kavanagh, and Hugo P. Oeisler, special attorneys, of counsel, respectively), for the United States.

PeR CuRIAm:

Now on this day these appeals came on severally to be heard. Thereupon, on the suggestion of the Assistant Attorney General, and upon an examination of the records and the entries in the same, it appears to the court that the entries in each and all of said matters were not liquidated at the times the several petitions for remission were filed in said causes and when said appeals were perfected. Therefore the court finds, following Woolworth et al. v. United States, 14 Ct. Cust. Appls. 81, T. D. 41583, that the said petitions for remission were filed prematurely and that the court below did not have jurisdiction to entertain the same at the time the several judgments thereon were rendered. The several appeals herein are therefore dismissed and the said causes are respectively remanded to the court below, with instructions to enter a judgment'in each of said causes, dismissing the petition therein, without prejudice.

Linck v. United States
14 Ct. Cust. 133

Case Details

Name
Linck v. United States
Decision Date
May 10, 1926
Citations

14 Ct. Cust. 133

Jurisdiction
United States

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!