Borden's Farm Products Co., Inc. v. Ten Eyck - 297 U.S. 251 (1936)


U.S. Supreme Court

Borden's Farm Products Co., Inc. v. Ten Eyck, 297 U.S. 251 (1936)

Borden's Farm Products Co., Inc. v. Ten Eyck

No. 597

Argued January 6, 1936

Decided February 10, 1936

297 U.S. 251

Syllabus

1. As an incident to a temporary and experimental scheme for assisting the milk industry by fixing prices to producer and consumer (Nebbia v. New York, 291 U. S. 502), the New York Milk Control Act, as amended, discriminated between dealers who had, and dealers who had not, well advertised tradenames, by permitting the latter to sell bottled milk in the City of New York at a price one cent less per quart than the price prescribed for the former. Held, that there was a reasonable basis for the discrimination, and that a dealer of the former class who failed to show that, in practice, the differential had resulted in any gain of trade at its expense by the latter class of dealers, or had caused it substantial loss, did not

Page 297 U. S. 252

prove a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 297 U. S. 261, 297 U. S. 263.

2. The findings in this case establish that, before the fixing of prices under the Act, dealers without well advertised brands were able to compete for the trade in question, but only by slightly underselling their advertised competitors. The differential is sustained as an attempt, competent to the legislature during the limited term of the experiment, to preserve this trade practice, already existing, which balanced the advantage of a lower price for the one group against the advantage of advertisement enjoyed by the other. P. 297 U. S. 261.

11 F.Supp. 599 affirmed.

Appeal from a decree which dismissed, upon the final hearing, a suit to enjoin the enforcement of a provision of the New York Agriculture & Markets Law. For an earlier phase, see s.c., 293 U. S. 194. Cf. p. 297 U. S. 266, post.

Page 297 U. S. 256



Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.