Gentry

Bayside Fish Flour Co. v. Gentry

Good Law
8 F. Supp. 67·1934 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1293
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 31, 1934No. 3721California1,328 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sure, J.

Plaintiff is a corporation engaged in the business of manufacturing, under a patented process, fish flour from sardines caught on the high seas beyond the three-mile limit of the state of California. Its plant is located at Point San Pablo, this state. Suit is brought by plaintiff against members of the fish and game commission, its executive officer, and the Attorney General, all officers of the state, to enjoin the execution of certain provisions of Act 2870, establishing a Fish and Game Code (St. 1933, p. 394; Deering’s Gen. Laws Supplement 1933, p. 1418), revising and consolidating the law of California relating to fish and game and other wild life, and containing, among other things, commercial fishing regulations. Under the provisions of the Code, a license was issued to the plaintiff by the state “to can, cure, preserve or pack fish which are taken in the waters of this state, or fish brought into this state in a fresh condition, or to manufacture fish-scrap, fish-meal, fish-oil, chicken-feed or fertilizer from fish or fish offal, or to deal in mollusks or crustaceans by wholesale.”

The sections of the Code involved read as follows:

“§ 1064. Waste. It is unlawful to cause…

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.