True. Brinkley’s lawyers unsuccessfully argued that the goat gland surgeries were not relevant to this case, wanting (for obvious reasons) to limit testimony to Brinkley’s activities after 1933, when he stopped performing the goat gland surgeries. Judge McMillan ruled that the jury should consider the entirety of Brinkley’s career, including the goat gland surgeries, when deciding whether or not Fishbein libelled him by calling him a quack.
"Legal Setback Given to Gland Specialist," United Press, The San Bernardino County Sun, 26 Mar 1939, Sun, Page 3; "The Case of Brinkley v. Fishbein", Journal of the American Medical Association, May 13, 1939, Volume 112, No. 19, p. 1958;
"Legal tacticians noted that Brown kept returning to goats and gonads as the subject most ripe for ridicule, despite strenuous and ongoing objections from Morriss that all this was 'irrelevant and immaterial,' since the transplants had stopped six years ago. The more McMillan allowed the questioning, the madder the plaintiff's attorneys got" (Brock, 240).
"The Case of Brinkley v. Fishbein", Journal of the American Medical Association, May 13, 1939, Volume 112, No. 19, p. 1952-1969.