Voss

Voss v. Superior Court

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 580·46 Cal. App. 4th 900·54 Cal. Rptr. 2d 225·96 Daily Journal DAR 7264·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4616
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 1996F023017California12,195 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dibiaso, J.

We hold that section 14 of the Food and Agricultural Code expressly exempts the issuance of marketing orders under the California Marketing Act of 1937 (Food & Agr. Code, § 58601 et seq.) from all of the requirements of the California Administrative Procedure Act (Gov. Code, § 11346 et seq.).

Facts and Procedural History

In 1993, a group of plum growers and handlers calling themselves the “Stone Fruit Coalition” approached the California Department of Agriculture (Department), provided it with a proposed mandatory California plum marketing order, and requested that the order be issued pursuant to the provisions of the California Marketing Act of 1937 (CMA). The proposed marketing order set out a plum marketing program to be administered by the Department.

A “marketing order” is an order issued by the Secretary of the Department (secretary) (see Food & Agr. Code, §§ 35, 50, 58741) “pursuant to” the CMA that “prescribes rules and regulations that govern the processing, distributing, or handling, in any manner of any commodity within [California] during any specified period.” (Food & Agr. Code, §§ 58615, 58741, 58742.) A “commodity” for purposes of the CMA includes (but…

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.