7 U.S.C. § 78
Use of official grade designations required; false or misleading grade designations for grain shipped out of the United States
(a) Whenever standards relating to kind, class, quality, or condition of grain are effective under section 76 of this title for any grain no person shall in any sale, offer for sale, or consignment for sale, which involves the shipment of such grain in interstate or foreign commerce, describe such grain as being of any grade in any advertising, price quotation, other negotiation of sale, contract of sale, invoice, bill of lading, other document, or description on bags or other containers of the grain, other than by an official grade designation, with or without additional information as to specified factors: Provided, That the description of such grain by any proprietary brand name or trademark that does not resemble an official grade designation, or with respect to interstate commerce, by the use of one or more grade factor designations set forth in the official United States standards for grain, or by other criteria shall not be deemed to be a description of grain as being of any grade.(b) No person shall, in any sale, offer for sale, or consignment for sale, of any grain which involves the shipment of such grain from the United States to any place outside thereof, knowingly describe such grain by any official grade designation, or other description, which is false or misleading.(Aug. 11, 1916, ch. 313, pt. B, § 6, 39 Stat. 484; Pub. L. 85–509, July 11, 1958, 72 Stat. 352; Pub. L. 90–487, § 1, Aug. 15, 1968, 82 Stat. 763; Pub. L. 94–582, § 7, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2870; Pub. L. 95–113, title XVI, § 1606(c), Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1030.)Editorial NotesAmendments1977—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 95–113 substituted “criteria” for “factor information”.
1976—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 94–582 substituted “standards relating to kind, class, quality, or condition of grain” for “standards”.
1968—Pub. L. 90–487 substituted provisions requiring the use of official grade designations and prohibiting the use of false or misleading description of grain shipped out of the United States, for provisions allowing the appeal to the Secretary from official grading, authorizing the payment of additional fees for employees required in making appeal inspections, and making the findings prima facie evidence of the grain’s true grade.
1958—Pub. L. 85–509 authorized payment of employees assigned to perform appeal inspection for all overtime, night, or holiday work, and permitted acceptance of reimbursement for any sums paid for such work.
Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1977 AmendmentAmendment by Pub. L. 95–113 effective Oct. 1, 1977, see section 1901 of Pub. L. 95–113, set out as a note under section 1307 of this title.
Effective Date of 1976 AmendmentAmendment by Pub. L. 94–582 effective 30 days after Oct. 21, 1976, see section 27 of Pub. L. 94–582, as amended, set out as a note under section 74 of this title.
Effective Date of 1968 AmendmentPub. L. 90–487, § 2, Aug. 15, 1968, 82 Stat. 770, provided that: “This Act [amending this section and sections 71, 74, 75, 76, 77, 79, 84, 85, 86, and 87 of this title and enacting sections 87a to 87h of this title] shall become effective one hundred and eighty days after enactment hereof [Aug. 15, 1968], except that the repeal of the mandatory inspection provisions with respect to grain shipped or delivered for shipment in interstate commerce shall become effective thirty days after enactment hereof, and the provisions of sections 6(a) and 13(a)(5) of the United States Grain Standards Act, as amended by this Act [subsec. (a) of this section and section 87b(a)(5) of this title] shall then become effective with respect to such grain.”
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Paul v. Oates, 560 F.2d 45 (2d Cir. 1977).
· cites it 2× “§ 4245 and findings made pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 78 . (Section 78 has been modified substantially by Act of August 15, 1968, Pub.”
Gollehon Farming v. United States, 17 F. Supp. 2d 1145 (D. Mont. 1998).
“See, 7 U.S.C. § 78 . 4 . The principal advantage of the NIRT technology lay in its ability to assay whole grains of wheat.”
Sage v. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 477 F. Supp. 1205 (D.N.H. 1979).
“7 U.S.C. § 78 , findings of Secretary of Agriculture prima facie evidence of true grade of grain; 42 U.”
Elbow Lake Coop. Grain Co. v. Commodity Credit Corp., 144 F. Supp. 54 (D. Minnesota 1956).
“There is nothing in 7 U.S.C.A. § 78 which requires as a condition precedent that an inspection certificate must have been issued before an appeal from that inspection may be taken.”
Rainey v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 827 F.2d 1498 (11th Cir. 1987).
“7 U.S.C. § 78 , findings of Secretary of Agriculture prima facie evidence of true grade of grain; 42 U.”
Farmers Coop. Elevator Co. v. Commodity Credit Corp., 144 F. Supp. 65 (D.S.D. 1956).
· cites it 2× “There is nothing contained in 7 U.S.C.A. § 78 which requires as a condition precedent that an inspection certificate must have been issued before an appeal from that inspection may be taken.”
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.