BUL4602 Fall-2011 Lecture 6, Reading 8

BUL4602 Fall-2011 Lecture 6, Reading 8 - PIKE v. BRUCE...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
PIKE v. BRUCE CHURCH, INC page 1 397 U.S. 137, 90 S.Ct. 844, 25 L.Ed.2d 174 Supreme Court of the United States Loren J. PIKE, etc., Appellant, v. BRUCE CHURCH, INC. No. 301. Argued Jan. 13, 1970. Decided March 2, 1970. Action by grower of high quality cantaloupes against official charged with enforcing the Arizona Fruit and Vegetable Standardization Act to enjoin order prohibiting grower from transporting uncrated cantaloupes from its Arizona ranch to a nearby California city for packing and processing as unconstitutional. A three-judge District Court for the District of Arizona issued a permanent injunction, and state official appealed. The Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Stewart, held that the order, which would compel grower to build packing facilities in Arizona that would cost approximately $200,000, constituted an unlawful burden upon interstate commerce. Affirmed. Rex E. Lee, Phoenix, Ariz., for appellant. Jacob Abramson, Salinas, Cal., for appellee. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellee is a company engaged in extensive commercial farming operations in Arizona and California. The appellant is the official charged with enforcing the Arizona Fruit and Vegetable Standardization Act. FN1 A provision of the Act requires that, with certain exceptions, all cantaloupes grown in Arizona and offered for sale must ‘be packed in regular compact arrangement in closed standard containers approved by the supervisor * * *.’ FN2 Invoking his authority under that provision, the appellant issued an order prohibiting the appellee company from transporting uncrated cantaloupes from its Parker, Arizona, ranch to nearby Blythe, California, for packing and processing. The company then brought this action in a federal court to enjoin the order as unconstitutional. A three-judge court was convened. 28 U.S.C. ss 2281 , 2284 . After first granting temporary relief, the court issued a permanent injunction upon the ground that the challenged order constituted an unlawful burden upon interstate commerce. This appeal followed. 28 U.S.C. s 1253 . 396 U.S. 812, 90 S.Ct. 91, 24 L.Ed.2d 65 . FN1. Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann., Tit. 3, c. 3, Art. 4. FN2. Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. s 3-503, subsec. C . (Supp.1969). *139 [1] The facts are not in dispute, having been stipulated by the parties. The appellee company has for many years been engaged in the business of growing, harvesting, processing, and **846 packing fruits and vegetables at numerous locations in Arizona and California for interstate shipment to markets throughout the Nation. One of the company's newest operations is at Parker, Arizona, where, pursuant to a 1964 lease with the Secretary of the Interior, the Colorado River Indian Agency, and the Colorado River Indian Tribes, it undertook to develop approximately 6,400 acres of uncultivated, arid land for agricultural use. The company has spent more than $3,000,000 in clearing, leveling, irrigating, and otherwise developing this land. The company began growing cantaloupes on part of the land in 1966, and has harvested a large cantaloupe crop there in each
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 08/23/2011 for the course BUL 4602 taught by Professor Johnson during the Spring '11 term at W. Florida.

Page1 / 4

BUL4602 Fall-2011 Lecture 6, Reading 8 - PIKE v. BRUCE...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online