Legal Opinion
Allied Properties v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
California Supreme Court
Decided November 30, 1959No. S. F. 20236PublishedCited by 72 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
Allied Properties was accused of violating sections 55.5, 55.6 and 55.65 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act and rule 99 of the State Board of Equalization by advertising and offering to sell at retail distilled spirits and wines at prices less than the minimum resale prices provided for by fair trade contracts filed with the board.1 (Subsequently the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control became the constitutional successor of the board with regard to liquor control (Const., art. XX, § 22, as amended in 1954), and it has been substituted as the defendant herein. For convenience we shall…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Nebbia v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Crowley v. ChristensenSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Miller v. Board of Public Works of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Ziffrin, Inc. v. ReevesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Birkenfeld v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Sail'er Inn, Inc. v. KirbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- In Re CreglerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Wilke & Holzheiser, Inc. v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Ralphs Grocery Co. v. ReimelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.