United States v. Nysco Laboratories, Inc., and Eugene J. Yoss

318 F.2d 817, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5046
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedJune 7, 1963
Docket28171_1
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 318 F.2d 817 (United States v. Nysco Laboratories, Inc., and Eugene J. Yoss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Nysco Laboratories, Inc., and Eugene J. Yoss, 318 F.2d 817, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5046 (2d Cir. 1963).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellants attack an order of Judge Bruchhausen enjoining them, pursuant to § 302(a) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 332 (a), from shipping in interstate commerce a drug containing phenylpropanolamine hydrochloride. The labeling of the drug suggested that its ingredient is adequate and effective in weight reduction and appetite control. But these representations were found to be false and misleading under § 502(a) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 352(a), by Judge Meaney, D.C.N.J., in a seizure suit between the same parties in the case before us, which is the action for an injunction, United States v. 60 28-Capsule Bottles, more or less, etc., D.C.N.J., 211 F.Supp. 207. Judge Bruchhausen held that Judge Meaney’s determination was res judicata on the “false and misleading” issue and granted the government’s motion for an injunction.

*818 We think Judge Bruchhausen was entitled to rely on Judge Meaney’s findings, and we affirm his order. Since the district court’s order expressly provides that the court shall retain jurisdiction “for the purpose of enforcing or modifying” its decree, the parties will be able to make any motions they deem fit in the light of the outcome of the appeal from Judge Meaney’s decision taken to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

Affirmed.

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

Related

MacFarlane v. Village of Scotia, NY
86 F. Supp. 2d 60 (N.D. New York, 2000)
Antonious v. Muhammad
873 F. Supp. 817 (S.D. New York, 1995)
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
901 F.2d 288 (Second Circuit, 1990)
Petrella v. Siegel
843 F.2d 87 (Second Circuit, 1988)
Matter of Independent Refining Corp.
65 B.R. 622 (S.D. Texas, 1986)
U.S. Life Title Insurance v. Wade (In Re Wade)
26 B.R. 477 (N.D. Illinois, 1983)
Cerbone v. County of Westchester
508 F. Supp. 780 (S.D. New York, 1981)
Neeld v. National Hockey League
439 F. Supp. 446 (W.D. New York, 1977)
Rodriguez v. Beame
423 F. Supp. 906 (S.D. New York, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
318 F.2d 817, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-nysco-laboratories-inc-and-eugene-j-yoss-ca2-1963.