Legal Opinion

Milk Control Board v. Eisenberg Farm Products

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 3, 1939No. 426PublishedCited by 138 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Roberts

We are called upon to determine whether a local police regulation unconstitutionally regulates or burdens interstate commerce.

Pennsylvania, by an Act of April 30, 1935 1 has declared the milk industry in that Commonwealth to be a business affected with a public interest. The statute defines a milk .dealer as any person “who purchases or handles milk within the Commonwealth for- sale, shipment, storage,' processing or manufacture within or without the Commonwealth.” It creates a Milk Control Board with authority to investigate, supervise, and regulate the industry and imposes penalties for…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Baldwin v. G. A. F. Seelig, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. Lemke v. Farmers Grain Co. of EmbdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. Shafer v. Farmers Grain Co. of EmbdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  4. Rohrer v. Milk Control BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. Colteryahn Sanitary Dairy v. Milk Control CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by138 opinions

  1. Parker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. Huron Portland Cement Co. v. City of DetroitSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. Breard v. AlexandriaSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  4. H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc. v. Du MondSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  5. Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona Ex Rel. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1945

133 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API