People v. Rosenbloom
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
YANKWICH, J., pro tem.
The defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of violation of the Pure Drugs Act of 1907 (DBering’s General Laws, 1923 ed., Act 58).
*764The complaint alleged that the defendant did, on March 23, 1931, “sell and offer for sale and hold out for sale and offer to deliver a drug, to-wit: extract of ginger Superior Brand, which was then and there mislabelled and misbranded”.' It is contended that the complaint does not state an offense. Sections 5 and 6 of the act describe several distinct acts by way of definition of the terms “mislabelled or misbranded”, and section 1…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- People v. CroninCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- People v. DillonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- People v. McClennegenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- People v. GardnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- People v. ChavesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.