## Facts

- Max Feinberg owned and operated a cigar store in Philadelphia’s skid-row area and sold Sterno, a fuel product.
- In late 1963, a new “industrial” Sterno formulation containing 54% methanol (highly toxic if ingested) was distributed in the same type of cartons as prior product; the can lid, however, bore a skull-and-crossbones and warnings: “Danger. Poison. For use only as a Fuel. Not for consumer use.”
- Feinberg received a shipment of the new formulation on or about December 21, 1963, and sold about 400 cans between December 21 and December 28.
- The evidence showed Sterno in that neighborhood was commonly purchased “as a beverage by chronic alcoholics,” and this misuse was known in the area.
- A methanol poisoning outbreak followed; 31 people died, and numerous cases were traced to the new Sterno.
- On December 27, Feinberg notified his supplier that the cartons contained a new type of Sterno and sought to return what remained unsold; the unused cartons were retrieved the next day.
- Feinberg was indicted for 31 counts of involuntary manslaughter and for offenses premised on the Pennsylvania Pharmacy Act.

## Issues

1. Whether involuntary manslaughter convictions could stand even though Sterno was not within the Pennsylvania Pharmacy Act and no statutory violation under that Act supported liability.
2. Whether the evidence proved the required culpability for involuntary manslaughter—gross negligence or reckless disregard for human life—and a sufficient causal connection between Feinberg’s sales and the deaths.

## Decision

- The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s judgment.
- The court left in place the reversal of the Pharmacy Act–based convictions.
- The court affirmed 17 convictions for involuntary manslaughter.
- The court held the evidence permitted findings that Feinberg’s conduct was grossly negligent/reckless and that his sales were a legal cause of the deaths.

## Legal Principles

- Involuntary manslaughter may be based on a lawful act performed in a grossly negligent or reckless manner demonstrating wanton disregard for the safety of others.
- A regulatory or statutory violation is not a necessary predicate for involuntary manslaughter if the defendant’s conduct independently satisfies the common-law culpability standard and causes death.
- Foreseeability and knowledge of misuse may establish recklessness where the defendant continues supplying a dangerous product to persons likely to use it in a lethal way, particularly when explicit poison warnings are present.
- Causation is satisfied where the deaths are a natural and probable result of the defendant’s reckless conduct and the record supports both factual linkage and proximate cause.

## Conclusion

The court sustained Feinberg’s involuntary manslaughter convictions because selling prominently labeled poisonous Sterno in a setting where he knew it would be consumed supported findings of reckless disregard for human life and causation, even without liability under the Pharmacy Act.


Commonwealth v. Feinberg, 253 A.2d 636 (Pa. 1969)