Legal Opinion
United States v. Articles of Drug . . . Hormonin
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided August 29, 1980No. Civ. A. 80-587PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MEANOR, District Judge.
This action was commenced on March 3, 1980 by the filing of a complaint for forfeiture pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq. The complaint alleged that the articles of drug Hormonin No. 1 tablets and Hormonin No. 2 tablets were “new drugs”, as defined in 21 U.S.C. § 321(p), which had not received approval for marketing pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 355(b) and, therefore, could not be introduced into interstate commerce under 21 U.S.C. § 355(a). The drugs in question were seized by the United States Marshal at the Cedar Knolls,…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Federal Crop Ins. Corp. v. MerrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Utah Power & Light Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Weinberger v. Hynson, Westcott & Dunning, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. RutherfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. Article of Drug . . . Bacto-UnidiskSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- United States v. Alcon Laboratories, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
- United States v. 789 Cases, More or LessDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1992
- United States v. Undetermined Quantities of Various Articles of Drug ... Equidantin Nitrofurantoin Suspension .... Appeal of Performance Products, IncCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Premo Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1981
- United States v. Articles of DrugDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.