Legal Document

338 U.S. 269 70 Supreme Court Reporter 110 94 L.Ed. 63 REILLYv.PINKUS. Number 31. Argued Oct. 13, 1949. Decided Nov. 14, Mr. Robert L. Stern, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Bernard C. Segal, Philadelphia, Pa., respondent. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Federal statutes have long authorized Postmaster General to forbid delivery mail and payment money orders 'any person or company' found, 'upon evidence satisfactory' him, be 'conducting any * scheme device obtaining through mails by means false fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises *.'1 Following a hearing issued such an order restricting respondent's use mails.2 2 The representations on which is based relate anti-fat treatment, nationally advertised under name 'Dr. Phillips' Kelp-I-Dine Reducing Plan.' 'Kelp-I-Dine' used respondent granulated kelp, natural seaweed product containing iodine. Plan twofold: It requires users take one-half teaspoonful per day, suggests following recommended daily diet accompanies vials kelp. 3 Respondent's advertisements made expansive claims its plan. They represented that persons suffering from obesity could 'eat plenty' yet reduce 5 pounds in week surely easily, 'without tortuous diet' without feeling hungry. Unhappy people eager but also eat plenty were repeatedly reassured with alluring subtly qualified as these: 'Remember Kelpidine Plan, you don't cur out ice cream, cake, candy, other things like eat. You just cut down them.' alleged safety remedy extraordinary efficacy kelp emphasized stating it 'makes no difference if are 16 60, diabetes, rheumatism ailment. always safe doctors approve simply half teaspoon once each day three regular sensible meals. decreases your appetite.' 4 Two wide general knowledge field dietetics treatment called Government fraud hearing. testified iodine, chiefly attributed fat-reducing powers valueless anti-fat; would not hunger; suggested was too drastic medical supervision, particularly where suffered chronic diseases diabetes heart trouble. one physician iodine physicians weight reducer, expressed his judgment did value use. Even he, however, conceded dosage fifty sixty times more than witness admitted 'rigid,' might prove harmful tuberculosis, anemia, disease. findings reducer whatever there lay recommendations. He found neither uniformly nor harmless dangerous afflicted kidney troubles; not, represented, pursued ease comfort, hunger, while eating had led believe they could. On these entered. 6 District granted injunction against enforcement ground unsupported factual evidence.3 Asserting 'no exact standard absolute truth' measured, court held testimony two whch Government's case rested reduced conflicting status mere opinion. As such, insufficient rule laid this American School Magnetic Healing versus McAnnulty, 187 94, 23 33, 47 90. Appeals affirmed substantially same ground.4 Both courts distinguished Leach Carlile, 258 138, 42 227, 66 511, we whether at all bar far greater curative actually have. Important questions concerning scope McAnnulty sufficiency support postoffice prompted us grant certiorari. 7 First. contended here, both below held, must set aside case. There forbidden upon finding fact petitioner guilty falsehood 'mind human race largely responsible ills, does possess innate power, proper exercise faculty brain mind, control ills humanity heir *.' (187 37) This order, pointing widely schools mind affect bodily diseases, scientific advanced point actual intent deceive who asserted either Thus truth assertions fraud.' At best, way 'opinion' imperfect proof 'as ordinary fact' impossible. 8 Respondent appears argue bars whenever least conflict effects remedy. contention seems even most experienced experts can never rise above unless expert has tests drug determine relation particular false. holding go so far. We do understand accept prescribing inexorable automatically reliance fact-finding tribunal informed every time witnesses produced blindly adhere technique thoroughly discredited reliable experiences. But decision wholesome limitation when charges concern practices fields been crystallized crucible experience. For science medicine, sciences, experimentation spur progress. amount condemnation new ideas trial give power condemn solely because some cling traditional opinions unquestioning tenacity. 9 In conflict, though slight, reducer. assume state flux question, think sufficient 'Reducing Plan' whole misrepresented advertising. And those misrepresentations went beyond permissible 'puffing' seller's wares; material credulous persons, reduce, entitled rely. Despite subtle qualifying phrases difficult read receiving impression that, contrary facts justifiably General, sure reducer; user uncomfortably usual ample fattening foods; absolutely ages, ill well. See Donaldson Read Magazine, 333 178, 188—189, 68 591, 596—597, 92 628. These deceive, fall squarely within type justify fraud. 10 Second. Nevertheless constrained hold present should enforced. pointed doctors' their professional knowledge. To extent acquired text books publications, placed reliance. cross-examination sought question statements books, shown respectable authorities. permitted. undue restriction right cross-examine. certainly illogical, unfair, permit book knowledge, then deprive party challenging opportunity interrogate them about divergent reputable books. 11 Petitioner seeks exclusion merely dictionaries. consult dictionaries ascertain remedy, although kept purposes. assert fat tended refute government 12 error here memorandum official indicated he exluded materials adverse admissible. object using test expert's having him refer comment contents. deprived opportunity. deprivation cured fact-finder subsequently examine material. 13 Moreover, issues cases make peculiarly appropriate. Proof purposes essential—an 'actual deceive.' Seven Cases United States, 239 510, 517, 36 190, 193, 60 411, L.R.A.1916D, 164. Consequently established proving incorrect statement made. An inferred universality belief advertising wholly unsupportable; conversely, likelihood inference lessened cause admit less universal first testified. 14 refuse regard sparingly exercised. A large discretion conduct necessarily reposed administrative agency. what said taken removing compulsory opening gates floods volumes, authoritative. kind others, whom serious given reasonable cross-examine vital issue purpose deceive. precluded assistant solicitor presiding hearings adopted prosecutor's view barred 'regardless good faith, believed matter fact.' 15 amiss Trade Commission authority cease-and-desist States Code KF62 45(a), (b), Annotated KF65 U5 § 45(a, b); F.T.C. Algoma Lumber Co., 291 67, 81, 54 315, 321, 78 655. approach severity order. Raladam 316 149, 62 966, 86 1336, instance, business extravagant similar many respects respondents ordered cease desist making statements. Except this, left free sell before. Unlike FTC cannot offender mails, destroy business. Brandeis, J., dissenting ex rel. Milwaukee Social Democratic Pub. company Burleson, 255 407, 417 et seq., 41 352, 356, 65 704. strikingly different consequences agencies basis analogous emphasize importance limiting Post-office Department instances clearly proved. affirmed, prejudice reopening proceedings additional choose so. 17 ordered. 18 Affirmed prejudice. 19 DOUGLAS took part consideration R.S. 3929, amended, 39 259, 259; 4041, 732, 732. Pinkus individually. trade names Pinkus, 'American Health Aids Company Energy Food Center, officers agents 71 F.Supp. 993, 994. Walker, 61 610. Cir., 170 Reporter, 2nd Series 786.

Classification Label: 7