10001. Misbranding of Esterex.    U. S. v. 4 Cases of Este*ex.   Tried to the court. 
Decree of condemnation.   Product ordopett release&r under beitd.   (F. D. C.
No. 13768.    Sample No., 7J.099-F.) .£;,': ' ' .  "
LIBEL FILED: September 13, 1944, District of, Oregon ^amended March 23-and 
July 2,1945. 
' >   • 
'   ;    . 
ALLEGED SHIPMENT: On or about June 28,1944, b^the CVO.and Mrs. Sethcess 
Co., from Chicago, Ill. •• 
-      -    "       *    -*•.•:••"
PRODUCT: 4 cases, each containing 4 1-gallon jugs, ofEsterex-at-POrtlaBBd; Oreg. 
Analysis showed that the "product was a water1 solution of monocfil(teagetic acid 
and other chlorides, containing about 11 grams of monoehlo-facetic acjd-per 
100 cc. 
• 
:', "     " •   -- - -   • t   *
LABEL IN PART: "Estrex; •*• * * Contains" Water and {Salts*and Esters of 
Monochloracetic Acid)." 
*"   < -~ *;
746610—47 1 
341
. in that it failed to reveal the fact that the article contained about 11 grams per
* -lOo^c. of monochloracetic acid, a poisonous and deleterious substance, which 
caused the article to be a "poisonous and deleterious substance and which
rendered it unwholesome
* and unsuitable for use as a component of food used 
by man. 
DISPOSITION : On November 28,1944, the C. O. and. D. Sethness Co., claimant, 
having filed a petition for the removal of the case for trial to another juris- 
diction, an order wjas entered directing the transfer of the case to the Eastern 
District of Wisconsin. Thereafter, the claimant filed an answer denying the 
. Misbranding of the product,, and on July 2, 1945, the case came on for trial 
before the court.   After consideration of the testimony of the parties and the
• arguments of counsel, th,e -court, on September,* 4, 1945, handed down the 
following findings of fact and conclusions of law 1
" F. RTAN DUFFY, District Judge:
' *
-     '      • FINDINGS OF FACT "*
'% On or about the 28th day of June, 1944 said C. O. & W. D. Sethness Com- 
pany
* did ship and consign from Chicago, Illinois to Portland, Oregon said 
article so 'seized. 
;
*  <
"2. That said article consists of a solution of monochloroacetic acid in water 
in the proportions of eleven grams of monochloroacetic acid to one hundred 
cubic centimeters of the article. Monochloroacetic acid is a poisonous and 
deleterious1 substance, and thet article is a poisdiobus and deleterious substance.
"3. Said article was sold and shipped by claimant to be used as a component
of food.     * 
" '" 
, r
"4. When introduced into interstate commerce as aforesaid, the labeling of
. said article represented that it was a non-poisonous and harmless substance
.  .»and failed to reveal the fact material in the light of such representation that
.said article is a poisonous arid deleterious substance, and that by reason of
•••said omission I find that said labeling was misleading within the meaning
" of Sec. 343 (a), Title 21, United States Code.
;   ,., "5. That Esterex, when used in proportions net to exceed 500 parts per mil- 
k lion of monochloroacetic acid,'does not render foods or beverages injurious,
. deleterious or unsafe for human consumption.       •
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW    ,
* 
"1. That the said article under seizure is misbranded in violation of Sec. 
343 (a), Title 21, United States;Code, because.its labeling is misleading within 
the meaning of Sec. 343 (a)„, 'and was introduced into interstate commerce in 
violation of Sec. 331 (a), Title 21, United States Code, and is subject to con- 
demnation, pursuariljgto Sec. 384 (a), Title 21, United States Code. Let a de- 
cree of condemnation*'be. entered accordingly, with costs against the claimant."
On September 4,1945, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product 
was ordered released under bond, to be brought'into compliance with the law, 
under the supervision of the Federal Security Agency.