Legal Opinion
Barber v. Bullard
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 2, 1983PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Kane, J.
Once again we must consider an attack upon the constitutionality of the Apple Marketing Order (AMO) and the *673statutory provisions which provide for its implementation (1 NYCRR Part 201; Agriculture and Markets Law, §§ 292, 294). This court has examined these provisions on prior occasions. The history, purpose and validity thereof are reported in Wickham v Trapani (41 Misc 2d 749, affd 26 AD2d 216) and Barber v Dembroski (70 AD2d 745, affd. 54 NY2d 648). In this action, defendants resist attempts to collect assessments required under the terms of the AMO as a…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- West Virginia State Board of Education v. BarnetteSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Wooley v. MaynardSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San DiegoSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Abood v. Detroit Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- PruneYard Shopping Center v. RobinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Barber v. BullardNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Cahill v. Public Service CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Delano Village Companies v. OrridgeNew York Supreme Court · 1990