Marketing Laws Survey Series: v. 1-6U.S. Government Printing Office, 1940 - Commercial law |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
administrative advertising agencies alcoholic beverages antitrust axle barber bill buyer Carolina Code Ann commodities common carriers competition competitors consumer contract carriers cooperatives Corrick Dakota dealers drug economic effect enacted engaged established exempt Federal Government governmental grades gross weight Group highways included industry inspection interstate commerce Interstate Trade Barriers Kentucky legislation legislature license limitations liquor Loss leader manufacturer margarine Marketing Laws Survey maximum ment merchandise mileage tax milk monopoly motor vehicles Nebraska nonresident North Carolina North Dakota Ohio operating ordinance Patent pools permit persons pharmacy law pounds practices Price Fixing Private and contract prohibit protection provisions public health purchase quarantine reciprocity registration fees regulation requirements Resale price control restrictions retail Rhode Island Sales Promotion section covers selling specific standards Stat statute Supp supra Supreme Court Swift & Co tion trade barriers transportation trucks United wholesalers Wisconsin
Popular passages
Page 114 - And the guaranty of due process, as has often been held, demands only that the law shall not be unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious, and that the means selected shall have a real and substantial relation to the object sought to be attained.
Page 7 - What is ultimate is the principle that one state in its dealings with another may not place itself in a position of economic isolation.
Page 132 - When the classification in such a law is called in question, if any state of facts reasonably can be conceived that would sustain it, the existence of that state of facts at the time the law was enacted must be assumed. 4. One who assails the classification in such a law must carry the burden of showing that it does not rest upon any reasonable basis, but is essentially arbitrary.
Page 92 - Such legislation may invade one class of rights to-day, and another to-morrow, and if it can be sanctioned under the Constitution, while far removed in time we will not be far away in practical statesmanship from those ages when governmental prefects supervised the building of houses, the rearing of cattle, the sowing of seed, and the reaping of grain, and governmental ordinances regulated the movements and labor of artisans, the rate of wages, the price of food, the diet and clothing of the people,...
Page 144 - ... within the meaning of section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act...
Page 7 - Neither the power to tax nor the police power may be used by the state of destination with the aim and effect of establishing an economic barrier against competition with the products of another state or the labor of its residents. Restrictions so contrived are an unreasonable clog upon the mobility of commerce. They set up what is equivalent to a rampart of customs duties designed to neutralize advantages belonging to the place of origin. They are thus hostile in conception as well as burdensome...
Page 143 - Mere size * * * is not an offense against the Sherman Act unless magnified to the point at which it amounts to a monopoly * * * but size carries with it an opportunity for abuse that is not to be ignored when the opportunity is proved to have been utilized in the past.
Page 2 - State statute or regulation which, on its face, or in practical effect, tended to operate to the disadvantage of persons, products, or services coming from sister States, to the advantage of local residents, products, and business, is a trade barrier.
Page 117 - But there can be no doubt that upon proper occasion and by appropriate measures the state may regulate a business in any of its aspects, including the prices to be charged for the products or commodities it sells.
Page 47 - Judicial control of national commerce — unlike legislative regulations — must from inherent limitations of the judicial process treat the subject by the hit-and-miss method of deciding single local controversies upon evidence and information limited by the narrow rules of litigation.