Legal Opinion
United States v. ARTICLE CONSISTING OF 2 DEVICES, ETC.
District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Decided June 27, 1966No. Civ. A. No. 981Published
1Opinion of the Court
255 F.Supp. 374 (1966)
UNITED STATES of America, Libelant,
v.
An ARTICLE of Device CONSISTING OF 2 DEVICES, MORE OR LESS, LABELED IN PART: "LINDQUIST CHRONOSONIC ULTRASOUND MODEL 401B * * * SERIAL 9845 (OR 9846)" "Caution: Federal law restricts this device to sale by, or on the order of, a practitioner licensed by the law of the State in which he practices, to use or order the use of the device" "* * * Lindquist Model S Muscle Stimulator R. J. Lindquist Co. * * * Los Angeles, Calif. * * * Serial No. * * *."
Harold M. Shock, Sr., Intervenor.
Civ. A. No. 981.
United States District Court W. D.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dent v. West VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Barsky v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Graves v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical ExaminersDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1965
- Kuhl v. Ark. State Board of Chiropractic ExaminersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.