Zellerbach

Bayside Fish Flour Co. v. Zellerbach

Good Law
124 Cal. App. 564·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 741·12 P.2d 961
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 29, 1932Docket No. 8096.California873 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

An appeal by petitioner from a judgment denying its petition for a writ of mandate to compel respondents, as members of the Fish and Game Commission, to issue in the form demanded by petitioner a permit to manufacture fish products.

Since the year 1924 petitioner has been manufacturing an edible fish flour from sardines. In 1921, by an amendment to an act to conserve the fish supply in California (Stats. 1919, p. 1204) the legislature declared it unlawful to use any kind or species of fish fit for human consumption for reduction purposes except fish offal, but provided that any person engaged in taking or dealing in fresh fish or fish products for human consumption, or canning, packing or preserving such fish, desiring to use in a reduction plant any fish fit for human consumption, might make application to the commission for permission to do so. The act provided for a hearing and for an order permitting the use of a certain amount of fish each month for reduction purposes, and that “said order shall not be granted for a period longer than a seasonal run of said kind or species of fish mentioned in said order” (Stats. 1921, p. 459). In 1925 the act was amended (Stats. 1925, p.…

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.