Under the U. S. legal system, an in rem action allows the government to file a lawsuit directly against physical property rather than the person or corporation that owns it.
One of the most famous examples of this doctrine is the 1911 federal case United States v. Forty Barrels and Twenty Kegs of Coca-Cola. Initiated under the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, the federal government seized the soda syrup, claiming that the added caffeine made the beverage 'injurious to health' and that its name was misleading because it contained very little coca and no cola.
Because the lawsuit was directed against the barrels themselves, the case title took on an absurd, memorable framing. The legal fight reached the U. S.
Supreme Court in 1916, where Justice Charles Evans Hughes authored an opinion rejecting Coca-Cola's argument that an added ingredient couldn't be an 'adulterant' if it was part of the original recipe. The court ruled that added ingredients, including caffeine, could indeed be scrutinized under federal safety laws. Coca-Cola eventually settled out of court, agreeing to reduce the caffeine content and pay court costs.
Beyond its quirky name, the case firmly established the federal government's authority to regulate added ingredients in consumer food and beverages using in rem forfeiture powers.