7 U.S.C. § 671

Arbitration of disputes concerning milk

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

(a) Application

The Secretary of Agriculture, or such officer or employee of the Department of Agriculture as may be designated by him, upon written application of any cooperative association, incorporated or otherwise, which is in good faith owned or controlled by producers or organizations thereof, of milk or its products, and which is bona fide engaged in collective processing or preparing for market or handling or marketing (in the current of interstate or foreign commerce, as defined by section 610(j) of this title), milk or its products, may mediate and, with the consent of all parties, shall arbitrate if the Secretary has reason to believe that the declared policy of the Agricultural Adjustment Act [7 U.S.C. 601 et seq.], as amended, would be effectuated thereby, bona fide disputes, between such associations and the purchasers or handlers or processors or distributors of milk or its products, as to terms and conditions of the sale of milk or its products. The power to arbitrate under this section shall apply only to such subjects of the term or condition in dispute as could be regulated under the provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended, relating to orders for milk and its products.

(b) Conduct of meetings

Meetings held pursuant to this section shall be conducted subject to such rules and regulations as the Secretary may prescribe.

No award or agreement resulting from any such arbitration or mediation shall be effective unless and until approved by the Secretary of Agriculture, or such officer or employee of the Department of Agriculture as may be designated by him, and shall not be approved if it permits any unlawful trade practice or any unfair method of competition.

(d) Exemption from antitrust laws

No meeting so held and no award or agreement so approved shall be deemed to be in violation of any of the antitrust laws of the United States.

(June 3, 1937, ch. 296, § 3, 50 Stat. 248.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Agricultural Adjustment Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is title I of act May 12, 1933, ch. 25, 48 Stat. 31, as amended, which is classified generally to chapter 26 (§ 601 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 601 of this title and Tables.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1937–1951 · leading case: Parker v. United States, 126 F.2d 370 (1st Cir. 1942).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Parker v. United States, 126 F.2d 370 (1st Cir. 1942). “(a corporation of which he is treasurer and sole stockholder), effects compliance with the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, 7 U.S.C.A. § 671 et seq., and with a mandatory injunction theretofore issued against the said corporation.”

United States v. Ass'n of Am. Railroads, 4 F.R.D. 510 (D. Neb. 1945). “The power of the Congress, by which the Sherman Act was adopted, to make exceptions from its provisions, or to suspend its operations within prescribed limitations, either temporarily or permanently, is not actually assailed and has been exercised on several occasions.”

Universal Milk Bottle Serv., Inc. v. United States, 188 F.2d 959 (6th Cir. 1951). “Appellants moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that it failed to state an offense under the Sherman Act, and, in support of their motions, appended thereto a milk marketing order and amendments issued pursuant to the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as…”

United States v. Whiting Milk Co., 21 F. Supp. 321 (D. Mass. 1937). · cites it 2× “The defendant contends that irreparable damage will be suffered by compulsory payments to the Marketing Administrator if it later develops that the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, 7 U.S. C.A. § 671 ét seq., Order No. 4, or' action taken thereunder, is…”

United States v. Spokane Fuel Dealers Credit Ass'n, 55 F. Supp. 387 (E.D. Wash. 1944). “The district court held that the existence of the authority vested in the Secretary of Agriculture, although unexercised, wholly destroyed the operation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act with respect to the marketing of agricultural commodities.”

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.