Case Name: PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, v. CHARLES NESSLER, Defendant
Court: New York Court of Special Sessions
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1919-02-14
Citations: 37 N.Y. Crim. 173
Docket Number: 
Parties: PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, v. CHARLES NESSLER, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Criminal Reports
Volume: 37
Pages: 173–179

Head Matter:
COURT OF SPECIAL SESSIONS — CITY OF NEW YORK —PART IV.
February 14, 1919.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, v. CHARLES NESSLER, Defendant.
(1.) Penal Law, § 421—Deceptive or misleading advertisement.
To make an advertisement criminal under Penal Law, § 421, it must contain some assertion, representation or statement of fact that is untrue, deceptive and misleading regarding what the accused offers in the shape of merchandise or service.
(2.) Same.
Defendant advertised that a recent patent. suit against complainant established that none but defendant used a process by which the hair was really steamed, and that an “injunction was granted against complainant on the ground that he put chemicals into the hair before boiling it.” Held, that this was a false statement, intentionally made to influence the public, and a violation of the statute.
Fees chi, J., dissenting.
Edward Swann, District Attorney, of counsel (Thomas McGrath, Assistant District Attorney, Joseph M. Deuel, and Charles H. Wilson), for People.
John J. O’Connell & Henry Wenzel, Jr., for defendant.

Opinion:
Edwards, J.:
I think the evidence compels the conclusion that the advertisement which was put in evidence was published by the defendant to promote his business. That it therefore related to something offered to the public for sale by him, as specified in the .statute; that the relevant statement contained in the advertisement, as part thereof and intended to effect its purpose, declaring that in the action of ¡Nessler against Frederic an " injunction had been granted against Frederic on the ground that he actually put chemicals into the hair before boiling it " was a false statement, intentionally made to influence the public, to the defendant's benefit. I think therefore that he violated the statute and I vote to convict him of the offense.