United States v. Lexington Mill & Elevator Co.
Citations
- 232 U.S. 399
- 34 S. Ct. 337
- 58 L. Ed. 658
- 1914 U.S. LEXIS 1369
Syllabus
<p>The primary purpose of Congress in enacting the Food and Drugs Act of 1906 was to prevent injury to the public health by the sale and transportation in interstate commerce of misbranded and adulterated food.</p> <p>As against adulteration the statute was intended to protect the. public health from possible injury by adding to articles of food consumption poisonous and deleterious substances which might render such articles injurious to health.</p> <p>Where such a purpose has been effected by plain and unambiguous language by an act within the power of Congress, the only duty of' the courts is to giye the act effect according to its terms.</p> <p>The inhibition in subdivision 5 of § 7 of the Food and Drugs Act of 1906 against the addition of any poisonous or other added deleterious ingredient which may render an article of food injurious to health is definitely limited to the particular class of adulteration specified, and in order to condemn the article under subdivision 5 it is incumbent upon the Government to establish that the added substance may render the article injurious to health.</p> <p>In subdivision 5 of § 7 of the Food and Drugs Act of 1906 the word “may” is used in its ordinary and usual signification; and if an article of food may not by the addition of a small amount of poisonous substance by any possibility injure the health of any consumer, it may not be condemned under this subdivision of the act.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- identifying the primary purpose of misbranding and adulteration provisions concerning food as consumer protection
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Day
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
101 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Federal Trade Commission v. Morton Salt Co.Supreme Court· 1948-05-03· cited 438×
- United States v. RutherfordSupreme Court· 1979-06-18· cited 398×
- Boston Sand and Gravel Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1928-11-19· cited 265×
- United States v. Shreveport Grain & Elevator Co.Supreme Court· 1932-11-07· cited 247×
- Young v. Community Nutrition InstituteSupreme Court· 1986-06-17· cited 224×
- United States Ex Rel. Texas Portland Cement Co. v. McCordSupreme Court· 1914-04-06· cited 178×
- United States v. Joann MitcheltreeTenth Circuit· 1991-07-24· cited 79×
- Leslie Salt Co. v. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1984-03-26· cited 74×
- United States v. Ninety-Five Barrels, More or Less, Alleged Apple Cider Vinegar, Douglas Packing Co.Supreme Court· 1924-06-02· cited 65×
- The Timken Company v. The United States, and China National MacHinery and Equipment Import and Export CorporationFederal Circuit· 1990-03-12· cited 65×
- One National Bank v. Joseph M. AntonellisFirst Circuit· 1996-04-03· cited 62×
- United States v. BurkleyTenth Circuit· 2008-01-15· cited 60×
- Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corporation Retiree Medical Benefits Trust v. RainesD.C. Circuit· 2008-08-08· cited 53×
- United States v. First Nat. Bank of DetroitSupreme Court· 1914-06-08· cited 50×
- Foster v. Tandy Corp.Fourth Circuit· 1987-09-16· cited 43×
- Flemming v. Florida Citrus ExchangeSupreme Court· 1959-01-26· cited 37×
- Biddle Purchasing Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionSecond Circuit· 1938-05-02· cited 37×
- Armour and Company v. Orville L. Freeman, Secretary of AgricultureD.C. Circuit· 1962-06-11· cited 32×
- Drummond Coal Company, Cross-Appellee v. James G. Watt, Cross-AppellantEleventh Circuit· 1984-07-02· cited 30×
- Berger v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1952-12-30· cited 29×
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
Other cases named United States v. Lexington Mill & Elevator Co.
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.