21 U.S.C. § 7 to 14

Repealed. June 25, 1938, ch. 675, § 1002(a), formerly § 902(a), 52 Stat. 1059; renumbered § 1002(a), Pub. L. 111–31, div. A, title I, § 101(b)(2), June 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1784

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 21 CasesGoogle Scholar

21 U.S.C. § 7 has no page of its own: the Office of the Law Revision Counsel prints it together with other sections as the single entry 21 U.S.C. § 7 to 14, shown below.

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1938–2012 · leading case: Chapman v. Brown, 198 F. Supp. 78 (D. Haw. 1961).
Chapman v. Brown, 198 F. Supp. 78 (D. Haw. 1961). “ho shall receive in any State or Territory or the District of Columbia from any other State or Territory or the District of Columbia, or foreign country, and having so received, shall deliver, in original unbroken packages, for pay or otherwise, or offer to deliver to any other…”
United States v. 48 Dozen Packages, 94 F.2d 641 (2d Cir. 1938). · cites it 2× “If it is within the act at all, it must fall within its purview as a “substance * * * intended to be used for the cure, mitigation, or prevention of disease of either man or other animals” defined to be a “drug” in Pure Food and Drugs Act § 6, 21 U.S.C.A. § 7 . That it was,…”
United States v. 23 7/12 Dozen Bottles, 44 F.2d 831 (D. Conn. 2012). “With these definitions in mind, we turn to section 6 of the act (21 USCA § 7), which defines “drug” as follows: “The tern ‘drug,’ as used in * * * this title, shall include all medicines and preparations recognized in the United States; Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary for…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.