Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MILK CONTROL COMMISSION v. RIECK DAIRY DIVISION NATIONAL DAIRY PRODUCTS CORPORATION. (09/16/60)

September 16, 1960

MILK CONTROL COMMISSION, APPELLANT,
v.
RIECK DAIRY DIVISION OF NATIONAL DAIRY PRODUCTS CORPORATION.



Appeal, No. 53, April T., 1960, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, April T., 1958, No. 2844, in case of Milk Control Commission of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Rieck Dairy Division of National Dairy Products Corporation. Order reversed.

COUNSEL

Marvin D. Weintraub, Assistant Attorney General, with him John Patrick McShea, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Anne X. Alpern, Attorney General, for Milk Control Commission, appellant.

Samuel A. Schreckengaust, Jr., with him Donald R. Waisel, William Eckert, and McNees, Wallace & Nurick, for milk dealer, appellee.

Frank E. Coho, with him Robert G. MacAlister, Stanley M. Simon, and Johnston & Coho, on behalf of appellee, under Rule 46.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, Watkins, and Montgomery, JJ.

Author: Woodside

[ 193 Pa. Super. Page 34]

OPINION BY WOODSIDE, J.

This appeal is from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County reversing an order of the Milk Control Commission which suspended the appellee's milk dealer's license for violation of section 807 of the Milk Control Law of April 28, 1937, P.L. 417, as amended, 31 P.S. § 700j-807.

This section provides, inter alia: "After the commission shall have fixed prices to be charged or paid for milk, ... it shall be unlawful for a milk dealer ... knowingly or unknowingly, or any other person knowingly, by himself or through another, to sell or deliver, or make available on consignment or otherwise, ... milk at any price below the minimum price or above the maximum price applicable to the particular transaction.

"No method or device shall be lawful whereby milk is ... sold or handled or delivered or made available on consignment or otherwise, ... at a price less than the minimum price applicable to the particular transaction, whether by any discount, premium, rebate, free service, trading stamps, advertising allowance, or extension of credit, ..." (Emphasis supplied).

In the recent cases of Shearer's Dairies, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Milk Control Commission, 191 Pa. Superior Ct. 574, 576, 159 A.2d 268 (1960) and Milk Maid Dairy Products, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Milk Control Commission, 190 Pa. Superior Ct. 410, 413, 414, 154 A.2d 274 (1959), we pointed out that the purpose of the Milk Control Law, as stated in its preamble, is to assure consumers a constant and sufficient supply of

[ 193 Pa. Super. Page 35]

    pure, wholesome milk, primarily through price regulation and control. We noted that although governmental price fixing and its concomitants may run counter to the philosophy of free enterprise, it has been firmly established in relation to milk for over a quarter of a century; that milk control is founded upon price control; and that to maintain an established price, it is necessary to prevent the seller from giving to the purchaser any ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.