In the case of United States v. Sullivan, Trading as Sullivan's Pharmacy in 1947, the Supreme Court ruled that a retail pharmacist could not avoid responsibility for selling misbranded drugs by claiming ignorance about their labeling. The defendant, Mr. Sullivan was charged with violating the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act for selling a drug labeled "Elixir Sulfanilamide-Massengill" which had been incorrectly labelled by its manufacturer and caused several deaths nationwide due to an unlisted toxic ingredient (diethylene glycol). He argued he should not be held responsible because he relied on his supplier's reputation and did not know it was mislabeled. However, the court disagreed stating that public health takes precedence over individual hardship in such cases where life or health is at stake; thus affirming strict liability under this law regardless of intent or knowledge.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Sullivan, Justice Rutledge argued that the majority's interpretation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act was too broad. He believed that a pharmacist who fills prescriptions should not be held responsible for misbranding drugs under this law because they are merely following doctors' orders and do not have control over what is written on labels or inserts provided by manufacturers. According to him, pharmacists should only be liable if they intentionally alter these materials in a way that makes them misleading or false. Furthermore, he contended that holding pharmacists accountable for such violations could potentially discourage them from providing necessary medications to patients out of fear of legal repercussions.