7 U.S.C. § 3

DEFINITIONS.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 7 CasesGoogle Scholar

“In this Act:“(1) The term ‘specialty crop’ means fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and horticulture and nursery crops (including floriculture).“(2) The term ‘State’ means the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.“(3) The term ‘State department of agriculture’ means the agency, commission, or department of a State government responsible for agriculture within the State.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1942–2019 · leading case: In the Matter of an Application to Enforce an Admin. Subpoena of the Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Naji Robert Nahas, 738 F.2d 487 (D.C. Cir. 1984).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In the Matter of an Application to Enforce an Admin. Subpoena of the Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Naji Robert Nahas, 738 F.2d 487 (D.C. Cir. 1984). · cites it 2× “In support of its assertion, the Commission invites our attention to 7 U.S.C. § 3 , which discusses transactions in interstate commerce and defines “State” as including foreign nations.”

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. John J. Muller, 570 F.2d 1296 (5th Cir. 1978). “7 U.S.C.A. § 3 . Thus, when these sections are read together, it is apparent that the jurisdiction of the Commission is sufficiently broad to encompass transactions involving foreign commerce, such as the London options.”

Vermilya-Brown Co. v. Connell, 335 U.S. 377 (1948). · cites it 2× “998 , 7 U. S. C. § 3 ; 42 Stat. 159 , 7 U. S. C.”

Walling v. Goldblatt Bros., 128 F.2d 778 (7th Cir. 1942). “998 , 7 U.S.C.A. § 3 ; Tobacco Inspection Act, sec.”

Vermilya-Brown Co. v. Connell, 335 U.S. 377 (1948). · cites it 2× “998 , 7 U.S.C. § 3 ; 42 Stat. 159 , 7 U.S.C. § 182 (6); 49 Stat.”

Am. Vanguard Corp. v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2019). “It found that the CSF submitted by American had not identified the impurity and therefore had not reported adequately the composition of the product as required by 7 U.S.C. § 3 and 40 C.F.R. § 158.320 . The EPA, as a result, ordered American to cease immediately the…”

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.