United States v. 11 1/4 Dozen Packages of Articles Labeled in Part Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powders for Drunkenness

Last updated

United States v. 11 1/4 Dozen Packages of Articles Labeled in Part Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powders for Drunkenness
Court United States District Court for the Western District of New York
Full case nameUnited States v. 11 1/4 Dozen Packages of Articles Labeled in Part Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powders for Drunkenness
DecidedJune 17, 1941
Citation(s)40 F. Supp. 208
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting John Knight
Keywords

United States v. 11 1/4 Dozen Packages of Articles Labeled in Part Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powders for Drunkenness, 40 F. Supp. 208, was a 1941 US federal court case heard in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, alleging the misbranding of a putative cure for alcohol intoxication. The action's unusual name results, in part, from the customs of cases with in rem jurisdiction, [1] and refers to 135 packages of the containers used to hold the powder. This case was one of the first actions taken by the United States Food and Drug Administration. [2]

Contents

Background

Label design of the product Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powers Label Design.png
Label design of the product

Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powders for Drunkenness, manufactured by M. F. Groves' Son & Co., was a product popular in the 19th century, [3] alleged to be an effective antidote for drunkenness. The powder was tartar emetic, antimony potassium tartrate, [4] [5] [6] which induces vomiting. By 1939, the product was considered a Mickey Finn, [7] and criminal convictions had been obtained for some sellers for selling unlabelled poisons. [8]

In 1938, the United States Congress passed the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), which gave authority to the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the manufacture and sale of food, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics involved in interstate commerce. Most of the provisions of that Act took effect in 1940. [9]

Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powders contained tartar emetic, the substance shown here. Brechweinstein.jpg
Mrs. Moffat's Shoo-Fly Powders contained tartar emetic, the substance shown here.

The FDA seized the packages following their shipment from the manufacturer in Philadelphia to Buffalo, New York, in November 1940. On November 27, the United States Attorney for the Western District of New York filed suit in district court under the FFDCA. [10]

District Judge John Knight presided at trial. During the trial, the manufacturer was allowed to intervene in the case, and, during the trial, argued that the product had been sold for over 60 years, and despite annual sales of over 50,000 packages, no complaints had allegedly been received. The manufacturer's statements were stricken as hearsay. [5] [11]

A panel of five physicians testified to the toxicity and side-effects of tartar emetic, with the opinion summarizing their testimony in part:

tartar emetic taken through the mouth irritates the lining of the stomach and intestines, produces various injurious effects on various other organs of the body; that it is cumulative in its effect; that when taken in increased doses it causes nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and retching; and after absorption affects the liver and kidneys and increases the heart rate; that through the loss of the control of the muscles of the stomach the vomitus may be swallowed causing pneumonia.

The court ruled that the phrase "for Drunkenness" suggested that the powder was a cure or antidote for alcohol intoxication, [12] with the judge concluding:

the articles in question are misbranded, since the labels thereon are false and misleading, because antimony and potassium tartrate in the dosage of 3.2 grains [Note 1] (the average in the articles analyzed) is not a "cure, mitigation or treatment" for drunkenness as purported to be and also that it is misbranded, because the use of the drug in the dosage of 3.2 grains is dangerous to health. [5]

Another issue in the case was the question of whether the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.   § 352, required an intent to "deceive and defraud"; Knight's ruling set a lasting precedent that such intent was not required to win condemnation under the Act. [5] [13]

The "11 1/4 dozen packages" were condemned and later destroyed. [5] [10]

Subsequent developments

The safety of the powders, argued in this case, has been further questioned, with at least one source wondering whether the rates of deaths attributed to liver failure and alcohol withdrawal during that era might have been due, instead, to the toxic effects of the product. [14]

No antidote for inebriation was known to science until Ro15-4513 was developed (but not brought to market) in the 1980s.

The case name has been the target of humor, by sources such as Harper's Magazine in 2004 and the Virginia Law Review in both 1955 and 2000. [4] [15] [16] [17]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food and Drug Administration</span> United States federal agency

The United States Food and Drug Administration is a federal agency of the Department of Health and Human Services. The FDA is responsible for protecting and promoting public health through the control and supervision of food safety, tobacco products, caffeine products, dietary supplements, prescription and over-the-counter pharmaceutical drugs (medications), vaccines, biopharmaceuticals, blood transfusions, medical devices, electromagnetic radiation emitting devices (ERED), cosmetics, animal foods & feed and veterinary products.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pure Food and Drug Act</span> 1906 consumer protection law in the US

The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, also known as Dr. Wiley's Law, was the first of a series of significant consumer protection laws which was enacted by Congress in the 20th century and led to the creation of the Food and Drug Administration. Its main purpose was to ban foreign and interstate traffic in adulterated or mislabeled food and drug products, and it directed the U.S. Bureau of Chemistry to inspect products and refer offenders to prosecutors. It required that active ingredients be placed on the label of a drug's packaging and that drugs could not fall below purity levels established by the United States Pharmacopeia or the National Formulary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tartaric acid</span> Organic acid found in many fruits

Tartaric acid is a white, crystalline organic acid that occurs naturally in many fruits, most notably in grapes, but also in tamarinds, bananas, avocados and citrus. Its salt, potassium bitartrate, commonly known as cream of tartar, develops naturally in the process of fermentation. It is commonly mixed with sodium bicarbonate and is sold as baking powder used as a leavening agent in food preparation. The acid itself is added to foods as an antioxidant E334 and to impart its distinctive sour taste. Naturally occurring tartaric acid is a useful raw material in organic chemical synthesis. Tartaric acid, an alpha-hydroxy-carboxylic acid, is diprotic and aldaric in acid characteristics, and is a dihydroxyl derivative of succinic acid.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cosmetics</span> Substances applied to the body to change appearance or fragrance

Cosmetics are constituted mixtures of chemical compounds derived from either natural sources, or synthetically created ones. Cosmetics have various purposes. Those designed for personal care and skin care can be used to cleanse or protect the body or skin. Cosmetics designed to enhance or alter one's appearance (makeup) can be used to conceal blemishes, enhance one's natural features, add color to a person's face, or change the appearance of the face entirely to resemble a different person, creature or object. Cosmetics can also be designed to add fragrance to the body.

In slang, a Mickey Finn is a drink laced with an incapacitating agent, particularly chloral hydrate, given to someone without their knowledge with the intent to incapacitate them or "knock them out"; hence the colloquial name knockout drops. Serving someone a "Mickey" is most commonly referred to as "slipping someone a mickey".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Potassium bitartrate</span> Chemical salt used in cooking as cream of tartar

Potassium bitartrate, also known as potassium hydrogen tartrate, with formula KC4H5O6, is a chemical compound with a number of uses, including:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Generally recognized as safe</span> United States government designation for food additives

Generally recognized as safe (GRAS) is a United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) designation that a chemical or substance added to food is considered safe by experts under the conditions of its intended use. An ingredient with a GRAS designation is exempted from the usual Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) food additive tolerance requirements. The concept of food additives being "generally recognized as safe" was first described in the Food Additives Amendment of 1958, and all additives introduced after this time had to be evaluated by new standards. The FDA list of GRAS notices is updated approximately each month, as of 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act</span> Acts of the United States Congress

The United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act is a set of laws passed by the United States Congress in 1938 giving authority to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to oversee the safety of food, drugs, medical devices, and cosmetics. The FDA's principal representative with members of congress during its drafting was Charles W. Crawford. A principal author of this law was Royal S. Copeland, a three-term U.S. senator from New York. In 1968, the Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions were added to the FD&C. Also in that year the FDA formed the Drug Efficacy Study Implementation (DESI) to incorporate into FD&C regulations the recommendations from a National Academy of Sciences investigation of effectiveness of previously marketed drugs. The act has been amended many times, most recently to add requirements about bioterrorism preparations.

In rem jurisdiction is a legal term describing the power a court may exercise over property or a "status" against a person over whom the court does not have in personam jurisdiction. Jurisdiction in rem assumes the property or status is the primary object of the action, rather than personal liabilities not necessarily associated with the property.

Title 21 of the United States Code governs Food and Drugs in the United States Code (U.S.C.).

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Criminal Investigations (OCI) provides the FDA with a specific office to conduct and coordinate its criminal investigations.

United States v. Forty Barrels and Twenty Kegs of Coca-Cola, 241 U.S. 265 (1916), was a federal suit under which the government unsuccessfully attempted to force the Coca-Cola Company to remove caffeine from its product.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ingredients of cosmetics</span> Ingredients used in makeup

Cosmetics ingredients come from a variety of sources but, unlike the ingredients of food, are often not considered by most consumers. Cosmetics often use vibrant colors that are derived from a wide variety of sources, ranging from crushed insects to rust.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Regulation of food and dietary supplements by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration</span> Governmental regulation of food quality

The regulation of food and dietary supplements by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is a process governed by various statutes enacted by the United States Congress and interpreted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA"). Pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and accompanying legislation, the FDA has authority to oversee the quality of substances sold as food in the United States, and to monitor claims made in the labeling about both the composition and the health benefits of foods.

The history of early food regulation in the United States started with the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, when the United States federal government began to intervene in the food and drug businesses. When that bill proved ineffective, the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt revised it into the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1937. This has set the stage for further government intervention in the food, drug and agricultural markets.

62 Cases of Jam v. United States, 340 U.S. 593 (1951), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "imitation jam," so labeled, was not a "misbranded" product under § 403 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, 21 U.S.C. § 343, even though it did not meet federal regulations for being fruit jam.

Pharmaceutical fraud involves activities that result in false claims to insurers or programs such as Medicare in the United States or equivalent state programs for financial gain to a pharmaceutical company. There are several different schemes used to defraud the health care system which are particular to the pharmaceutical industry. These include: Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Violations, Off Label Marketing, Best Price Fraud, CME Fraud, Medicaid Price Reporting, and Manufactured Compound Drugs. Examples of fraud cases include the GlaxoSmithKline $3 billion settlement, Pfizer $2.3 billion settlement, and Merck $650 million settlement. Damages from fraud can be recovered by use of the False Claims Act, most commonly under the qui tam provisions which rewards an individual for being a "whistleblower", or relator (law).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Antimony potassium tartrate</span> Chemical compound

Antimony potassium tartrate, also known as potassium antimonyl tartrate, potassium antimontarterate, or tartar emetic, has the formula K2Sb2(C4H2O6)2. The compound has long been known as a powerful emetic, and was used in the treatment of schistosomiasis and leishmaniasis. It is used as a resolving agent. It typically is obtained as a hydrate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970</span> US law

The Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 (PPPA); was signed into law by U.S. President Richard Nixon on December 30, 1970. It was enacted by the 91st United States Congress. This law required the use of child-resistant packaging for prescription drugs, over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, household chemicals, and other hazardous materials that could be considered dangerous for children.

References

Notes

  1. 3.2 grains is approximately 207 mg

Citations

  1. Arthur, William Reed (1955). The law of drugs and druggists: a treatise with text, cases, statutes, readings, and digests for schools of pharmacy, retail, wholesale, and manufacturing druggists. West Pub. Co. pp. 325–. Retrieved January 1, 2013.
  2. McClellan, Mark B (August 8, 2003). "Speech before National Press Club". FDA. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
  3. Smith, Mickey C. (December 31, 1988). Principles of Pharmaceutical Marketing, Third Edition. Psychology Press. pp. 487–. ISBN   9780866569354 . Retrieved January 1, 2013.
  4. 1 2 Dillard, Hardy Cross; Harris Hart II (February 1955). "Product Liability: Directions for Use and the Duty to Warn". Virginia Law Review. 41 (2): 177. doi:10.2307/1070193. JSTOR   1070193.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 "United States v. 111/4 DOZEN PACKAGES, ETC ..." Retrieved January 1, 2013.
  6. Haggard, Howard Wilcox (1942). Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Incorporated. p. 692. Retrieved January 1, 2013.
  7. Winchell, Walter (February 6, 1939). "On Broadway". Bradford Evening Star . The real name of a Mickey Finn in drug stores is: "Mrs. Moffet's [ sic ] Shoo-Fly Powders"
  8. "'Shoo-fly' Case Pair Convicted: Pharmacy Owner and Clerk, Mickey Finn Sellers, Seek Probation". Los Angeles Times . February 15, 1940.
  9. "New Drug Act Effective on January 1". The Evening Independent . December 30, 1939. p. 17. Retrieved January 1, 2013.
  10. 1 2 "Drugs and Devices Court Case Notices of Judgment" (PDF). Food and Drug Administration. pp. 316–9. Retrieved March 15, 2013.
  11. Maguire, John MacArthur; Morgan, Edmund Morris (1965). Cases and materials on evidence. Foundation Press. p. 376. Retrieved January 1, 2013.
  12. "Developments in the Law: The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act". Harvard Law Review. The Harvard Law Review Association. 67 (4): 653. February 1954. doi:10.2307/1337244. JSTOR   1337244.
  13. Title 21, Food and drugs: 601 - 847. LexisNexis. 2002. p. 438. ISBN   9780327134572.
  14. Rivers, P. Clayton; Nathan, Peter E. (1987). Alcohol & Addictive Behavior. U of Nebraska Press. p. 13. ISBN   9780803238800 . Retrieved January 1, 2013.
  15. "No contest". Harper's Magazine. January 2004. Archived from the original on 10 August 2007. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
  16. Yablon, Charles (February 2000). "Suing the Devil: A Guide for Practitioners". Virginia Law Review. 86 (1): 109. doi:10.2307/1073956. JSTOR   1073956.
  17. Gee, Thomas Gibbs (April 23, 1987). "EASTER SEAL SOCIETY FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN AND ADULTS OF LOUISIANA, INC. v. PLAYBOY ENTERPRISES, et al". OpenJurist. p. 323. Retrieved July 26, 2014.