United States v. Ruzicka et al., Trading As Seeley Dairy (329 U.S. 287)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 16, 1946 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 329 U.S. 287 · 67 S. Ct. 207
- Decided
- December 16, 1946
- Term
- October Term 1946
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Frankfurter
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Mr. Justice Frankfurter delivered the opinion of the Court. We brought this case here, 327 U. S. 776, because it raises questions of importance in the administration of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937. 50 Stat. 246, 7 U. S. C. § 601 et seq. The general scheme of the Act and its operation have been before us in a series of cases. United States v. Rock Royal Co-op., 307 U. S. 533; United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co., 315 U. S. 110; Stark v. Wickard, 321 U. S. 288. Our immediate concern is with the provisions of the Act that distribute enforcing authority between the courts and the Secretary of Agriculture. These become relevant to the enforcement of Milk Order No. 41, an “Order Regulating the Handling of Milk in the Chicago, Illinois, Marketing Area,” and more particularly the portion of that elaborate Order which defines the rights and obligations of ’“handlers” of milk. Section 941.1 (5). The Order was issued under the powers delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture to effectuate the purposes of the Act. Section 8c of the Act. Order No. 41 classifies milk received into the Chicago area according to its uses. To milk in each of the four classes the market administrator assigns a uniform “use value.” All handlers are required to report to the market administrator the quantity of milk purchased and put to its classified uses. On the basis of these reports,…
Excerpt of a 16,810-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.