25268. Misbranding of canned spinach. 17. S. v. Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co. 
Plea of guilty. Fine, $60. (F. & D. no. 34001. Sample nos. 5201-B, 
14403-B, 73344-A.)
This case was based on interstate shipments of canned spinach which was 
short in weight.
On May 15, 1935, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
California, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court an information against the Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co., a cor- 
poration, Oakland, Calif., charging shipment by said corporation, in violation 
of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about March 23 and May 2, 1934, from the 
State of California into the State of Massachusetts, and on or about April 
14, 1934, from the State of California into the State of Washington, of quan- 
tities of canned spinach which was misbranded. The article in the two con- 
signments first referred to was labeled in part: "Santa Cruz Brand California 
Spinach. Net Weight 11 Oz. Packed by Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co." The 
article in the consignment last referred to was labeled in part: "Santa Cruz 
Brand Spinach Contents 6 Lb. 4 Oz. Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co."
It was alleged that the article in the two consignments first referred to was 
misbranded in that the statement "Net Weight 11 Oz.", borne on the cans, 
was false and misleading, and in that by reason of said statement the article 
was labeled so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser, since the statement 
represented that the quantity of the contents of the cans each was 11 ounces; 
whereas in fact the quantity of contents of each of the cans was less than 
11 ounces.
It was alleged that the article in the consignment last referred to was mis- 
branded in that the statement "Contents 6 Lb. 4 Oz.", borne on the cans, 
was false and misleading, and in that by reason of said statement the article 
was labeled so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser, since the statement 
represented that the quantity of contents of each of the cans was 6 pounds 
4 ounces; whereas in fact the quantity of contents of each of the cans was 
less than 6 pounds 4 ounces.   Misbranding of the article in all three of the con-
81400—36 2
signments was alleged in that it was food in package form and the quantity of 
the contents of the package was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the 
outside of the package, since the quantity of the contents of the package, 
respectively, was less than the amounts respectively stated thereon.
On September 10, 1935, a plea of guilty was entered on behalf of the de- 
fendant corporation and the court imposed a fine of $60.
R. G. TUGWELL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.