Espy

Wileman Bros. & Elliott, Inc. v. Espy

Caution
58 F.3d 1367·1995 WL 379682
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 27, 1995No. 93-16977California9,019 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Scannlain, J.

We must delve into one of the more byzantine, and all-encompassing, areas of federal administrative regulation — that governing fruits and vegetables. In the process, we decide whether various regulations governing the size, maturity, and advertising of California tree fruits are arbitrary and capricious or otherwise in violation of the rights of those who handle and process the fruits.

I

Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc. and other growers, handlers, and processors of tree fruits in California (collectively “the handlers”) challenge various regulations contained in the nectarine and peach marketing orders, 7 C.F.R. pts. 916, 917, promulgated by the Secretary of Agriculture pursuant to the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, 7 U.S.C. § 601 et seq. The marketing orders set standards for, among other things, fruit maturity and minimum size. The marketing orders also impose assessments on handlers for the costs of a generic advertising program. The handlers claim that several of these regulations violate their free speech rights, due process rights, the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act.

A

The Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act…

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.