Alto Dairy v. Ann Veneman, Secretary of Agriculture, and Continental Dairy Products, Inc., Intervening

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that notice was sufficient because industry “insiders” would realize that an issue was at stake
• holding that notice was sufficient because industry “insiders” would realize that an issue was at stake
• upholding final rule prohibiting “paper pooling” of milk producers with “distant supply plants” because agency’s notice raised the issue of “pool” eligibility
• describing milk-pricing system as means of “redis- tribut[ing] wealth from consumers to producers of milk”
• describing system of uniform pricing as “price discrimination” and noting that price discrimination increases profits, “thus coun- teracting the alleged (though almost certainly spurious) tendency of dairy farmers to destroy their business by competing overvig- orously”
• “omissions are not en- actments; and even deliberate omissions are often subject to alternative interpretations”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).