United States v. Danube Carpet Mills, Inc., and Carl D. Hagaman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• considering the defendant’s failure to take “prompt remedial action upon discovery of the violations” in upholding civil penalty
• court presumed harm to the public from the fact that the defendant distributed carpet which failed to conform with the flammability standard
• where “information reaching the public posesse[s] the capacity to deceive, ‘the Government [is] not obligated to adduce evidence of specific injuries to consumers’”
• upholding civil penalties for violations of this Act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).