3789. Misbranding and alleged Adulteration of canned' boneless turkey meat.
U. S. v. 20 Cases of Boneless Turkey Meat.    Default decree of condemna- 
tion.    Product ordered delivered to a Federal institution.     (F. D. C. No.
6847.    Sample No. 85325-B.)
This product, which consisted of white and dark meat in about equal propor- 
tions, was packed in glass jars. Large pieces of the meat, % of which was white 
meat sliced fairly thin (Ys to % inch) were faced against the sides and bottom of 
the jar. The remaining space was filled with slices, pieces, and broth. The 
product was also short of the declared weight.
On February 18, 1942, the United States attorney for the Western District 
of Washington filed a libel against 20 cases of canned turkey meat at Seattle, 
Wash., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or 
about January 13, 1942, by Baird's Kitchen from Oakland, Oreg.; and charging 
that it was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Jars) 
"Napoleon Fancy Boneless Turkey Meat 16 Oz. Net A. Magnano Co. Distribu- 
tors     Seattle, Wash."
It was alleged to be adulterated in that a mixture of white and dark turkey 
meat with excessive broth had been substituted for "Fancy Boneless' Turkey 
Meat," which it purported to be.
It was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that the name "Fancy Boneless Turkey 
Meat" wasfalse and misleading since it contained broth in addition to meat; 
(2) in that the statement "16 Oz. Net" was false and misleading as applied to 
an article that was short weight; (3) in that the container was so filled as to 
be misleading since while it consisted of about equal parts of white and dark 
meat, the meat was so placed in the jar that 25 percent of dark meat and 75 
percent of white meat were visible through the glass, giving the impression of a 
greater proportion of white meat than was present and none of the broth was 
visible; (4) in that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing 
an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents; and (5) in that it was 
fabricated from two or more ingredients and its label failed to bear the common 
or usual name of each ingredient.
On July 31,. 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment was entered finding 
the product misbranded and ordering that it be condemned and delivered to a 
Federal institution.
NUTS AND NUT PRODUCTS