Corte v. State, 1 Div. 525

Decision Date29 October 1953
Docket Number1 Div. 525
Citation67 So.2d 782,259 Ala. 536
PartiesCORTE v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Hubert M. Hall, Bay Minette, for appellant.

Si Garrett, Atty. Gen., and George O. Miller, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

CLAYTON, Justice.

This is an appeal from an interlocutory decree of the circuit court of Baldwin County, in equity, overruling a motion to dissolve, and sustaining a temporary injunction. The appeal is authorized by Sec. 757, Tit. 7 of the Code of Alabama 1940. The bill of complaint alleges in substance that, at the time of filing and for a period of time immediately preceding the filing thereof, appellant, at Loxely, Alabama, was engaged in the business of producing, buying for resale, packing, selling, and shipping, and sold, and shipped from Loxley, Alabama, vegetables of the type and variety governed by the provisions of Act No. 977 of the Legislature of Alabama of 1951, p. 1650, Code 1940, Tit. 2, § 315(9) et seq.; that he did refuse to allow authorized agents or inspectors of the State Commissioner of Agriculture, entrance into the premises of his establishment for the purpose of inspecting and examining packages of vegetables to determine whether said packages of said produce were in compliance with the enforcement provisions of said Act No. 977. The bill further avers that it is necessary for said agents and inspectors to enter said establishment for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of said law, and that, without access to such premises, the Commissioner cannot effectively enforce the provisions of such law, or perform the duties placed upon him by the provisions thereof. The bill alleges further that the conduct of the respondent, in denying the agents or inspectors of the Commissioner access to the premises of appellant, has prevented the Commissioner from enforcing the provisions of said Act No. 977, and that it is necessary and vital to the enforcement of this law that said agents and inspectors enter said establishment, which establishment is used for receiving, buying, packing, selling, and shipping vegetables of the type and variety governed by the provisions of said law, and that complainant has no adequate remedy at law to compel appellant to allow agents or inspectors of the State Commissioner of Agriculture to enter his premises, although they have the legal right so to do.

Act No. 977 of the Legislature of 1951, is in the following language:

'An Act

'To provide for the inspection and grading of fresh fruits and vegetables grown in Alabama; prescribing the standard grade or grades for such fruits and vegetables; providing for the administration of the Act by the Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries and the Department of Agriculture and Industries; and prescribing penalties for violations of the Act.

'Be It Enacted by the Legislature of Alabama:

'Section 1. Declaration of Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to improve the grade and quality of fresh fruits and vegetables produced in Alabama in order that they may sell in competition with those produced in other areas. The fruit and vegetable industry is of great economic importance not only to the farmers of Alabama but to the general economy of the State and it has been found that fruits and vegetables produced and packed in Alabama are generally of substandard quality. Several neighboring states have enacted laws providing for shipping point inspection and grading of fruits and vegetables which laws have resulted in improving the quality and grade of fresh fruits and vegetables produced, packed and shipped from these states which has been to the economic gain and benefit to producers. Therefore, it is deemed for the best interest of the agricultural economy of the State of Alabama to regulate the shipping and packing of fresh fruits and vegetables by requiring and providing shipping point inspection for such agricultural commodities.

'Section 2. Definitions.--For the purpose of this Act--(a) The term 'person' means any individual, firm, partnership, corporation or association. (b) The term 'grower' means a bona fide producer of fresh fruits and vegetables either by self, or by tenant sharecropper or by hired person. (c) The term 'Closed package's means any basket, hamper, crate, carton, bag or other container used in the marketing of fresh fruits and vegetables if such container is closed with a lid of any description. (d) The term 'fresh fruits and vegetables' shall include green corn, tomatoes, Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, peaches, strawberries, cucumbers (sold for slicing purposes) and cabbages.

'Section 3. Official standards for fruits and vegetables grown in the State of Alabama, when packed in closed packages shall be the same as those issued by the United States Department of Agriculture and/or standards issued by the State Department of Agriculture and Industries.

'Section 4. Every closed package of fresh fruits or vegetables grown in the State of Alabama, before the same shall be offered for sale, shall be stamped, labeled or otherwise plainly marked (bags may be tagged) with: (a) The name and address of the grower or packer or the person by whose authority the fruit or vegetable was packed. (b) The grade of fresh fruit and vegetables contained in the package. (c) The markings as prescribed in this section shall be in letters or figures not less than one-half (1/2) inch in height, except in consumer packages which shall be marked with letters comparable to the size of the package.

'Section 5. When the State Board of Agriculture and Industries determines that it is for the best interest of producers of fruits and vegetables in a certain area of the State of Alabama and the Board of Agriculture and Industries determines that a better quality and grade of fruits and vegetables will be produced by requiring inspection and grading of such fruits and vegetables the State Board of Agriculture and Industries shall have authority to require that every closed package containing fresh fruits and vegetables shall be, before the same is transported into, within or out of the State of Alabama, subject to Federal and/or State inspection in accordance with the standard grades established in Section 3 of this Act; that is to say, the State Board of Agriculture and Industries shall have authority to require Federal and/or State inspection of fruits and vegetables and shall further have authority to designate the area in which such inspection requirements shall apply.

'Section 6. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, offer for sale, expose for sale or transport for sale any fresh fruits and vegetables in any closed package which fails to bear the statements as required in Section 4 of this Act, or if the contents of the package fail to comply with the markings thereon, provided, that none of the provisions of Sections 3, 4 or 5 shall apply to any fruit or vegetable for canning, freezing, preserving or other method of processing provided, however, that the State Board of Agriculture and Industries shall have authority when it finds that it is for the best interests of producers of fruits and vegetables in any area of the State of Alabama to require that fruits and vegetables grown in such area for canning, freezing, preserving and all other methods of processing shall be subject to the provisions of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of this Act.

'Section 7. The Commissioner of Agriculture, through any designated division of the Department of Agriculture and Industries shall be charged with the enforcement of the provisions of this Act and for that purpose shall have the power and authority to: (a) enter and inspect personally, or through any authorized agent or inspector, every place within the State of Alabama where fresh fruits or vegetables are produced, packed, stored for sale, shipped, offered for sale or sold, and to inspect such places, and all fresh fruits and vegetables, containers, records and equipment found in any such places. (b) certify to growers, shippers and other financiall interested parties the grade, quality and condition of fresh fruits or vegetables as provided in this Act; and to charge reasonable fees designed to cover the cost of these services, which fees, together with all money collected in the enforcement of this Act must be deposited in the Agricultural Fund (Shipping Point Inspection account) and shall be reexpended by him in carrying out the provisions of this Act. (c) promulgate rules and regulations not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act which rules and regulations shall have the full force and effect of law.

'Section 8. Every person, who by themselves, their agents, or employees, violates any of the provisions of this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall upon conviction thereof be punished as prescribed by law.

'Section 9. The provisions of this Act are hereby declared to be severable. If any of its sections, provisions, exceptions, clauses, phrases or parts be held unconstitutional or void, the remainder of this Act shall continue in full force and effect, it being the legislative intent now hereby declared, that this Act would have been adopted even if such unconstitutional or void matter had not been included therein.

'Section 10. This Act, upon passage shall take effect on and after January 1, 1952.

'Approved September 12, 1951.

'Time: 6:56 P.M.'

The motion to dissolve the temporary injunction challenges the equity of the bill, stated in various ways, and seriously argues for reversal on two grounds. First, that the Commissioner of Agriculture had not taken formal action under the provisions of Sec. 5 of the Act to require the grading of fruits and vegetables in the area in which appellant's fruits and vegetables were grown. The second point argued by appellant for a reversal of the case, is that the injunction was issued to prevent the commission of an alleged criminal offense, and that the penal provisions of the Act provide an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Western Grain Co. Cases, 6 Div. 374
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 3, 1955
    ...McLean v. Church of God, 254 Ala. 134, 138, 47 So.2d 257; Lukes v. Alabama Power Co., 257 Ala. 590, 592, 60 So.2d 349; Corte v. State, 259 Ala. 536, 542, 67 So.2d 782. We do not think the trial court abused its discretion in denying the applications for temporary injunctions and it follows ......
  • State ex rel. Marshall v. Ty Green's Massage Therapy, Inc.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 12, 2021
    ...in this case.4 This Court long ago considered the question whether criminal prosecution is an adequate remedy. See Corte v. State, 259 Ala. 536, 541, 67 So. 2d 782, 786 (1953). We held that it is not: " ‘Where an injunction is necessary for the protection for public rights, property or welf......
  • State v. Red Owl Stores, Inc.
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • July 25, 1958
    ... ...         Syllabus by the Court ...         1. The legislature in the exercise of its police power may in the interest ... Bosch v. Denny's Place, 98 Ohio App. 351, 129 N.E.2d 532; Corte v. State, 259 ... Page 110 ... Ala. 536, 67 So.2d 782; Commonwealth ... ...
  • Lauderdale County Bd. of Ed. v. Alexander
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • April 9, 1959
    ...from by all the respondents. An appeal from this decree is allowed by Tit. 7, § 757, Code 1940, and was the method used in Corte v. State, 259 Ala. 536, 67 So.2d 782. The second decree is an interlocutory decree rendered by the court overruling the demurrers of two of the seven respondents ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT