12206. Misbranding of olive oil. 17. S. v. George P. Papadopnlos. Plea 
of guilty. Fine, $100. (F. & D. No. 16966. I. S. Nos. 1809-t, 1810-t, 
17029-t.)
On February 26, 1923, the United States attorney for the Southern District 
of New York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District Court of the United States for said district an information against 
George P. Papadopulos, New York, N. Y., alleging shipment by said defendant, 
in violation of the food and drugs act as amended, on or about March 4, 1922, 
from the State of New York into the State of Missouri and into the District of 
Columbia of quantities of olive oil which was misbranded. The article was 
labeled in part: (Can) " Olio d'Oliva * * * Vergine * * * Net Contents 
Full Gallon " (or "Net Contents Full Quarter Gallon ") " * * * G. P. Papa- 
dopulos New York, U. S. A."
Examination by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department showed that the 
average volume of 22 so-called gallon cans from the shipment into the District 
of Columbia was 0.968 gallon and that the average volume of 10 so-called gallon 
cans from the shipment into Missouri was 0.971 gallon. Examination by said 
uureau showed that the average volume of 15 of the so-called quarter-gallon 
cans was 0.242 gallon.
Misbranding of the article was alleged in the information for the reason 
that the statements, to wit, " Net Contents Full Gallon " and " Net Contents 
Full Quarter Gallon," borne on the respective-sized cans containing the article, 
were false and misleading in that they represented that each of the said cans 
contained one gallon net or one-quarter gallon net of the article, as the case 
might be, and for the further reason that the article was labeled as aforesaid 
so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that each of the 
said cans contained one gallon net or one-quarter gallon net of the said article, 
as the case might be, whereas, in truth and in fact, the said cans did not 
contain the amount declared on the respective labels but did contain a less 
amount. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the article was 
food in package form and the quantity of the contents was not plainly and 
conspicuously marked on the outside of the packages.
On October 1, 1923, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to the information, 
and the court imposed a fine of $100.
HOWARD M. GORE, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.