Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

United States v. Park

United States Supreme Court
421 U.S. 658 (1975)


Facts

John Park (defendant) was president and chief operating officer of Acme Markets, Inc., (Acme) (defendant), a national retail food chain. The Government charged Acme and Park in federal district court with several violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (FDCA). The Government alleged that Park and Acme had received food at its warehouses that had been shipped in interstate commerce and allowed the food to be accessed by rodents and exposed to contamination. Acme pleaded guilty, but Park proceeded to trial. At trial, the prosecution produced evidence that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had sent Park a letter regarding the unsanitary conditions at Acme’s Philadelphia, Pennsylvania warehouse in April 1970. The following year, the FDA found similar conditions at Acme’s Baltimore, Maryland, warehouse. Another letter was sent to Park after the unfavorable inspection. In March 1972, another inspection of the Baltimore warehouse showed slight improvement, but still revealed evidence of rodent “activity” in the food. Park was the only defense witness and testified that he investigated the sanitary issues and had conferred with corporate officers regarding the matter. On cross-examination Park conceded that providing sanitary conditions for food offered for sale to the public was something that he was “responsible for in the entire operation of the company.” The jury found Park guilty and he appealed. The court of appeals reversed and held that the district court should have instructed the jury that the government had the burden of establishing “wrongful action” by Park. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Burger, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Dissent (Stewart, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.