O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 2-13-9 (2019)

When commercial feed deemed misbranded

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A commercial feed shall be deemed to be misbranded:

(1) If its labeling is false or misleading in any particular;

(2) If it is distributed under the name of another commercial feed;

(3) If it is not labeled as required in Code Section 2-13-8;

(4) If it purports to be or is represented as a commercial feed or if it purports to contain or is represented as containing a commercial feed ingredient, unless such commercial feed or feed ingredient conforms to the definition, if any, prescribed by regulation by the Commissioner; or

(5) If any word, statement, or other information required by or under the authority of this chapter to appear on the label or labeling is not prominently placed thereon with such conspicuousness (as compared with other words, statements, designs, or devices in the labeling) and in such terms as to render it likely to be read and understood by the ordinary individual under customary conditions of purchase and use.

History

Code 1933, § 42-205, enacted by Ga. L. 1972, p. 10, § 1.

Annotations

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 35 Am. Jur. 2d, Food, § 24 et seq.

C.J.S. - 36A C.J.S., Food, §§ 38, 39, 44, 45.