Legal Opinion

Herbold Laboratory, Inc. And Milton Herbold v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided June 26, 1969No. 22105_1PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ELY, Circuit Judge:

The Federal Trade Commission issued, in 1951, a Cease and Desist Order di recting appellants to refrain from advertising that their product “Herbold Pomade” was capable of restoring a user’s hair to its “former natural shade or color.” 1 In 1965, the Government instituted suit in the District Court, seeking the imposition of civil penalties authorized by the Federal Trade Commission Act, § 5(1). 15 U.S.C. § 45(l). The action was grounded upon certain alleged violations by appellants of the Order. The District Court imposed fines totaling $3,500.00 upon finding that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Porter v. Warner Holding Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Mitchell v. Robert DeMario Jewelry, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. State of Alabama v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
  4. United States v. Herbold Laboratory, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 1967

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. United States v. Beatrice Foods Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974
  2. Presidio Enterprises, Inc. v. Warner Bros. Distributing Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
  3. United States v. Beatrice Foods CompanyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1972
  4. United States v. Itt Continental Baking CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1972
  5. Presidio Enterprises, Inc. v. Warner Bros. Distributing Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API