Asgrow Seed Co. v. Winterboer
Supreme Court of the United States
1DissentJustice Stevens
The key to this statutory puzzle is the meaning of the phrase, “as a step in marketing,” as used in 7 U. S. C. § 2541(a)(3) (1988 ed., Supp. V). If it is synonymous with “for the purpose of selling,” as the Court holds, see ante, at 188, then the majority’s comprehensive exposition of the statute is correct. I record my dissent only because that phrase conveys a different message to me.
There must be a reason why Congress used the word “marketing” rather than the more common term “selling.” Indeed, in § 2541(a)(1), contained in the same subsection of the statute as the crucial language,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. Univis Lens Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Deepsouth Packing Co. v. Laitram Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. StrausSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Sexton v. WheatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Asgrow Seed Company v. Denny Winterboer and Becky Winterboer, D/B/A Deebee'sCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993