Florida Statute 499.006 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIII
REGULATION OF TRADE, COMMERCE, INVESTMENTS, AND SOLICITATIONS

Chapter 499
FLORIDA DRUG AND COSMETIC ACT

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 499.006

499.006 Adulterated drug or device.—A drug or device is adulterated, if any of the following apply:

(1) It consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance.

(2) It has been produced, prepared, packed, or held under conditions whereby it could have been contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health.

(3) It is a drug and the methods used in, or the facilities or controls used for, its manufacture, processing, packing, or holding do not conform to, or are not operated or administered in conformity with, current good manufacturing practices to assure that the drug meets the requirements of this part and that the drug has the identity and strength, and meets the standard of quality and purity, which it purports or is represented to possess.

(4) It is a drug and its container is composed, in whole or in part, of any poisonous or deleterious substance which could render the contents injurious to health.

(5) It is a drug and it bears or contains, for the purpose of coloring only, a color additive that is unsafe within the meaning of the federal act; or, if it is a color additive, the intended use of which in or on drugs is for the purpose of coloring only, and it is unsafe within the meaning of the federal act.

(6) It purports to be, or is represented as, a drug the name of which is recognized in the official compendium, and its strength differs from, or its quality or purity falls below, the standard set forth in such compendium. The determination as to strength, quality, or purity must be made in accordance with the tests or methods of assay set forth in such compendium, or, when such tests or methods of assay are absent or inadequate, in accordance with those tests or methods of assay prescribed under authority of the federal act. A drug defined in the official compendium is not adulterated under this subsection merely because it differs from the standard of strength, quality, or purity set forth for that drug in such compendium if its difference in strength, quality, or purity from such standard is plainly stated on its label.

(7) It is not subject to subsection (6) and its strength differs from, or its purity or quality falls below the standard of, that which it purports or is represented to possess.

(8) It is a drug:

(a) With which any substance has been mixed or packed so as to reduce the quality or strength of the drug; or

(b) For which any substance has been substituted wholly or in part.

(9) It is a drug or device for which the expiration date has passed.

(10) It is a prescription drug for which the required transaction history, transaction information, or transaction statement is nonexistent, fraudulent, or incomplete under the requirements of this part or applicable rules, or that has been purchased, held, sold, or distributed at any time by a person not authorized under federal or state law to do so.

(11) It is a prescription drug subject to, defined by, or described by s. 503(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act which has been returned by a veterinarian to a limited prescription drug veterinary wholesale distributor.

History.—s. 34, ch. 82-225; s. 1, ch. 83-265; ss. 10, 52, ch. 92-69; s. 9, ch. 2003-155; s. 1, ch. 2006-92; s. 6, ch. 2008-207; s. 5, ch. 2016-212.

F.S. 499.006 on Google Scholar

F.S. 499.006 on Casetext

Amendments to 499.006

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 499.006

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 499.006.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 499.006

Total Results: 14

Joel De La Osa v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-02-18

Citation: 158 So. 3d 712, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2279, 2015 WL 669563

Snippet: enterprise, the Florida Legislature amended section 499.006, Florida Statutes, to define an “adulterated drug

State v. Rodriguez

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2011-09-14

Citation: 71 So. 3d 154, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14534, 2011 WL 4056138

Snippet: distribution of the drug....” (emphasis added). Section 499.006, Florida Statutes (2003), provides, in relevant

Bio-Med Plus v. STATE, DEPT. OF HEALTH

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2005-10-20

Citation: 915 So. 2d 669, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 16640, 2005 WL 2662549

Snippet: drugs that were adulterated, as defined in s. 499.006, F.S., in violation of s. 499.005(1) and (4), F

Hillsborough County v. Kortum

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-08-23

Citation: 585 So. 2d 1029, 1991 WL 161733

Snippet: 167 (1946) (citing Wolfson v. Heins, 149 Fla. 499, 6 So.2d 858 (1942)). "[A]n easement will not per

Century Village v. Walker

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1984-04-25

Citation: 449 So. 2d 378

Snippet: authorities. *380 In Wolfson v. Heins, 149 Fla. 499, 6 So.2d 858 (1942), Wolfson obtained title to a private

Florida Bar

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1982-01-28

Citation: 414 So. 2d 490, 1982 Fla. LEXIS 2419

Snippet: be satisfied through home study programs; and *499(6) Such other methods as may be approved by the Board

Standard Marine Ins. Co. v. Allyn

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1976-06-23

Citation: 333 So. 2d 497, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15153

Snippet: municipality thereof, or the federal government. *499 6. Other motor vehicles which have not been categorized

Homer v. Dadeland Shopping Center, Inc.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1969-12-10

Citation: 229 So. 2d 834

Snippet: direct conflict with Wolfson v. Heins, 149 Fla. 499, 6 So.2d 858. The petitioners were the appellants

McNayr v. Claughton

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1967-05-02

Citation: 198 So. 2d 366

Snippet: interests in the land. Wolfson v. Heins, 1942, 149 Fla. 499, 6 So.2d 858; Stack v. City of Hoboken, 1957, 45 N

State Ex Rel. Hawkins v. Board of Control of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1950-08-01

Citation: 47 So. 2d 608, 1950 Fla. LEXIS 1052

Snippet: see also, State ex rel. Sharp v. Weeks, 93 Mo. 499, 6 S.W. 266; State v. Board of Metropolitan Police

Spencer v. Spencer

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1948-07-30

Citation: 36 So. 2d 424, 160 Fla. 749, 1948 Fla. LEXIS 854

Snippet: cites our holding in Wolfson v. Heins,149 Fla. 499, 6 So.2d 858, and contends that the rule enunciated

Saunders v. City of Jacksonville

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1946-04-02

Citation: 25 So. 2d 648, 157 Fla. 240, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 715

Snippet: the Constitution. See Wolfson v. Heins,149 Fla. 499, 6 So.2d 858. Generally all property owned is subject

Bancroft Investment Corp. v. City of Jacksonville

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1946-01-15

Citation: 27 So. 2d 162, 157 Fla. 546, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 800

Snippet: in it, Wolfson et al. v. Heins et ux., 149 Fla. 499, 6 So.2d 858. Neither do we think it the law of this

Henderson v. Hines

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1923-11-28

Citation: 86 Fla. 494, 98 So. 333

Snippet: track connected with the said line of railroad. *499”6. That upon each of said car load shipments, the