Savitch v. Federal Trade Commission

Second Circuit

Savitch v. Federal Trade Commission

218 F.2d 817

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 26, 1955·No. No. 125, Docket 23102·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Commission’s conclusion, contrary to that of its Hearing Examiner, that petitioners had at least indirectly represented their product to be an abortifacient, was a reasonable interpretation of petitioners’ advertise[818]*818ment, which we accept in the light of the Commission’s special expertise' and responsibility in the premises. There was sufficient evidence. to support the finding that borderline anemia would not in itself cause delayed menstruation, and both the Commission and the Hearing Examiner agreed that petitioners’ product would not be immediately effective to overcome other minor functional disorders. Consequently the Commission’s order must be enforced.'

Decision affirmed; enforcement granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The Commission’s conclusion, contrary to that of its Hearing Examiner, that petitioners had at least indirectly represented their product to be an abortifacient, was a reasonable interpretation of petitioners’ advertise[818]*818ment, which we accept in the light of the Commission’s special expertise' and responsibility in the premises. There was sufficient evidence. to support the finding that borderline anemia would not in itself cause delayed menstruation, and both the Commission and the Hearing Examiner agreed that petitioners’ product would not be immediately effective to overcome other minor functional disorders. Consequently the Commission’s order must be enforced.'

Decision affirmed; enforcement granted.

Savitch v. Federal Trade Commission, 218 F.2d 817 (2d Cir. 1955).

Pincite

218 F.2d 817 (Savitch v. Federal Trade Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related