This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-11-11 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Anent petitioners' claim that one or two samples of the Top Gel products from each of them, instead of confiscating thousands of the products, would have sufficed for the purpose of an anticipated criminal action, citing our ruling in Summerville General Merchandising Co. v. Court of Appeals,[39] is not meritorious. | |||||