Mayflower Farms, Inc. v. Ten Eyck
United States Supreme Court
297 U.S. 266 (1936)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
New York (defendant) passed a statute prescribing the minimum price for milk. The statute permitted off-brand milk to be priced one cent per quart lower than name-brand milk. However, the lower price minimum was permitted only for off-brand milk dealers who had been in the milk business as of April 10, 1933, the date that the statute was passed. Over the approximately two years prior to the enactment of the statute, name-brand milk was sold, on average, at prices at least one cent per quart higher than off-brand milk. This price difference resulted from market forces due to name-brand milk dealers heavily advertising their milk. Mayflower Farms, Inc. (plaintiff) entered the milk business selling off-brand milk after April 10, 1933. Mayflower brought suit, arguing that by not permitting it to sell milk at the lower price, the statute violated its right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, J.)
Dissent (Cardozo, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
