Rice

Midcal Aluminum, Inc. v. Rice

Good Law
153 Cal. Rptr. 757·1979 Cal. App. LEXIS 1543·90 Cal. App. 3d 979
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 26, 1979Civ. 17992California2,704 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reynoso, J.

The recent Supreme Court opinion of Rice v. Alcoholic Bev. etc. Appeals Bd. (1978) 21 Cal.3d 431 [ 146 Cal.Rptr. 585 , 579 P.2d 476], which invalidated California’s price maintenance laws relating to retail sales of distilled spirits, gives rise to this litigation. By writ of mandate Midcal Aluminum, Inc., seeks a determination as to the validity of the fair trade and price posting laws regulating the sale, both wholesale and retail, of wine in this state. We hold, as a logical axle of the Rice wheel, that the fair trade and price posting laws relating to wine are invalid—at the wholesale and retail level.

1. The Background

An accusation was filed against petitioner before the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control charging that on or about July 21, 1978, it sold or caused to be sold to a licensed retailer 27 cases of wine at prices less than the selling prices contained in the effective price schedule filed with the department by the E & J Gallo Winery. The second count charged that petitioner had sold or had caused to be sold to certain retailers wine for which there was no effective fair trade contract duly filed with the department. The petitioner stipulated to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.