Dixie Dairy v. Chicago
355 F.Supp. 1351
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division.
DIXIE DAIRY COMPANY, a corporation, Plaintiff,
CITY OF CHICAGO, a municipal corporation, et al., Defendants.
No. 70 C 3212.
March 15, 1973.
Action by Indiana milk processor against city of Chicago, Chicago Board of Health, Commissioner of Board of
Health and its members for declaratory judgment, injunctive relief and damages based on alleged
unconstitutionality of city milk inspection ordinance. On cross motions for summary judgment, the District
Court, Bauer, J., held that neither Chicago ordinance requirement that permit for sale and distribution of milk
and milk products produced by distant source will issue only after city inspectors have examined the milk
producers and processors without charge nor the requirement of periodic subsequent inspection is violative of
the commerce clause of the United States Constitution.
Order in accordance with opinion.
Francis J. McConnell, John Borst, Jr., Richard P. Campbell, of McConnell, Curtis, Mahon & Borst, Chicago,
Ill., for plaintiff.
Richard L. Curry, Corp. Counsel, Chicago, Ill., for defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BAUER, District Judge.
This cause comes on the defendants' motion for summary judgment.
This is an action for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief based on the alleged unconstitutionality of a City
of Chicago ordinance and the actions of the Chicago Board of Health pursuant to that ordinance. Damages,
resulting from loss of revenue and profits, are alleged to substantially exceed $10,000 exclusive of interest and
The plaintiff is the Dixie Dairy Company (“Dixie”), an Illinois corporation engaged in the business of
purchasing, distributing and selling Grade A milk and milk products processed at its plant in Gary, Indiana.
Dixie is the holder of an Illinois Department of Public Health Permit which authorizes it to distribute Grade A
milk and milk products within the state. The defendants are the City of Chicago, the City of Chicago's Board of
Health (“Board of Health”), Dr. Murray Brown (the Commissioner of the Board of Health) and the individual
members of the Board of Health.
The plaintiff in its amended complaint alleges the following facts: All of plaintiff's fluid milk and milk products
have been and are produced, pasteurized and processed under regulations, standards and sanitation requirements
provided by the 1965 United States Public Health Service Model Grade A Ordinance and amendment thereto.
These provisions have been substantially adopted by statute in the State of Indiana and by regulation in Illinois.
Indiana, by statute, and Illinois by regulation provide that Grade A milk and milk products having their source
from points beyond the limits of routine inspection may be sold in their respective states when two conditions
are satisfied. First, the milk and milk products must be produced and pasteurized under regulations substantially
equivalent to those of the receiving state and, second, the shipping processor must have been awarded an