Cherry Growers, Inc. v. Agricultural Marketing & Bargaining Board
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtNeff, J.
In these consolidated cases, all involving the same three parties, we are presented issues of jurisdiction and statutory construction under the Agricultural Marketing and Bargaining Act (hereafter the amba or the act), MCL 290.701 et seq.-, MSA 12.94(101) et seq., to determine whether Cherry Growers, Inc. (CGl), is subject to the mandatory bargaining and arbitration provisions of the act. We hold that jurisdiction in this matter rests with the Agricultural Marketing and Bargaining Board (ambb) rather than the circuit court. We affirm the ambb’s determination that CGI is subject to mandatory…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Michigan Canners & Freezers Assn., Inc. v. Agricultural Marketing and Bargaining Bd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Farrington v. Total Petroleum, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1993
- Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance v. Marlette Homes, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1998
- Tryc v Michigan Veterans’ FacilityMichigan Supreme Court · 1996
- Marquis v. Hartford Accident & IndemnityMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Barrett v. Kirtland Community CollegeMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001
- City of Romulus v. Department of Environmental QualityMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004
- Houghton Lake Area Tourism & Convention Bureau v. WoodMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
- Bank v. Michigan Education Association-NeaMichigan Court of Appeals · 2016
- Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, Inc v. Department of TreasuryMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.