Legal Opinion
United States v. Article of Device Consisting of 2 Devices, More or Less, Labeled in Part: "Lindquist Chronosonic Ultrasound Model 401B Serial 9845 (or 9846)"
District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Decided June 27, 1966No. Civ. A. No. 981PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MILLER, Chief Judge.
This is a civil in rem seizure action instituted by the United States under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq. The original libel was filed on April 30, 1965, but described a device or devices that were not then in the possession of the claimant.
On May 21, 1965, the court granted leave to Harold M. Shock, Sr., to intervene in this case. The intervention was filed on June 14, 1965, and called the attention of the court to the fact that the devices listed in the libel of information were not within the jurisdiction of the court and were…
2Cases cited6 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
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. Articles of DrugCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- United States v. Harold M. Shock, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
- United States v. ARTICLE CONSISTING OF 2 DEVICES, ETC.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1966