Small & Co. v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 38. — ACTION BY THE COMMONWEALTH AGAINST W. H. SMALL & CO. TO RECOVER A FINE FOR A VIOLATION OF THE PURE FOOD LAW OF THE STATE. Appeal from Ohio Circuit Court.
Read the full summary
CASE 38. — ACTION BY THE COMMONWEALTH AGAINST W. H. SMALL & CO. TO RECOVER A FINE FOR A VIOLATION OF THE PURE FOOD LAW OF THE STATE. Appeal from Ohio Circuit Court. Judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. — The Court’s instruction were erroneous. 1. They did not limit the jury to the representations printed on the label or tag on the package. 2. They did not require the jury to believe from the evidence, to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt that defendant unlawfully committed the offense. 3. They did not require the jury to believe that the food product was adulterated within the meaning…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion op the court by
Judge Carroll
— Affirming.
This criminal proceeding in the form of a penal action was instituted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky against the appellant, a foreign corporation, to recover a fine for an alleged violation of the pure food law of the state. The substantial averments of the petition are: That ‘ on the-day of-, 1907, the defendant sold and delivered to F. M. Allen, in Ohio county, Ky., 100 pounds of food product marked ‘XXX Mixed Feed,’ and guaranteed its analysis to be as follows, viz: ‘Protein 13.81 per cent.; fat 3.15 per cent.; made from wheat middlings,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State ex rel. Kropf v. GilbertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- State v. Belle Springs Creamery Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1910
- American Express Co. v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- Foster-Milburn Co. v. ChinnCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910