It is hereby declared that marketing of motor fuel in Alabama is affected with the public interest. It is hereby declared to be the legislative intent to encourage fair and honest competition, and to safeguard the public against creation of monopolies or unfair methods of competition, in transactions involving the sale of, or offer to sell, or inducement to sell motor fuel in the wholesale and retail trades in this state. It is further declared that the advertising, offering for sale, or sale of motor fuel below cost or at a cost lower than charged other persons on the same marketing level with the intent of injuring competitors or destroying or substantially lessening competition is an unfair and deceptive trade practice. The policy of the state is to promote the general welfare through the prohibition of such sales. The purpose of the Motor Fuel Marketing Act is to carry out that policy in the public interest, providing for exceptions under stated circumstances, providing for enforcement and providing penalties.
(Acts 1984, No. 84-260, p. 433, §3.)
Notes of Decisions
State Ex Rel. Galanos v. Mapco Petroleum, 519 So. 2d 1275 (Ala. 1987).
· cites it 8× “The Act contains the following "Legislative declaration and intent," § 8-22-3: "It is hereby declared that marketing of motor fuel in Alabama is affected with the public interest.”
Home Oil Co., Inc. v. Sam's East, Inc., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (M.D. Ala. 2002).
· cites it 2× “1987), the Alabama Supreme Court identified three sections of the AMFMA which, when necessarily construed together, buttress an actionable claim: § 8-22-3, Legislative declaration and intent 19 ; § 8-22-6, Certain below cost sales prohibited; 20 and § 8-22-9, Unlawful acts…”
McGuire Oil Co. v. Mapco Petroleum, Inc., 763 F. Supp. 1103 (S.D. Ala. 1991).
· cites it 5× “Ala.Code § 8-22-3. 4. Intent to injure competition is not an essential element of a plaintiffs prima fa-cie case under the AMFMA.”
S. Oil Co. Inc v. Lehigh Gas Wholesale Servs. Inc (N.D. Ala. 2024).
· cites it 4× “) (quoting Ala. Code § 8-22-3 ). Although the court appreciates that the AMFMA expresses Alabama’s policy of “promot[ing] the general welfare through the prohibition of” anticompetitive practices, see Ala.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.