Fouke Co. v. Brown, Civ. S-78-398 PCW.
Decision Date | 15 January 1979 |
Docket Number | No. Civ. S-78-398 PCW.,Civ. S-78-398 PCW. |
Citation | 463 F. Supp. 1142 |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California |
Parties | The FOUKE COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, and Gary's Leather Creations, Inc., a California Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. Edmund G. BROWN, Jr., Governor and Evelle J. Younger, Attorney General, Defendants. |
Donald M. Pach, Donald M. Pach, Inc., Sacramento, Cal., Wayne B. Wright, McDonald, Wright & Bryan, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs.
Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen. by R. H. Connett, Asst. Atty. Gen., Raymond H. Williamson, Deputy Atty. Gen., Sacramento, Cal., for defendants.
FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause coming on to be heard on Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment supported by affidavit and brief, and the Defendants having filed no affidavits in contravention of the affidavit of Plaintiffs, and the Court being of the opinion that there are no disputed issues of fact, this Court finds as follows:
Plaintiffs bring this action for a declaratory judgment that California Penal Code Sec. 653o is unconstitutional and that Defendants be restrained from enforcement thereof. California Penal Code Section 653r should also be considered.
California Penal Code, Sec. 653o provides as follows:
California Penal Code, Sec. 653r provides as follows:
Plaintiff The Fouke Company is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal office and processing plant located in Greenville County, South Carolina, where it is engaged in the business of processing, tanning, and marketing hides of alligators and other reptiles.
Plaintiff Gary's Leather Creations, Inc. is a California corporation with its principal office and manufacturing plant located in Los Angeles County, California, where it is engaged in the business of fabricating animal hides into wallets, handbags, and articles of specialty goods.
Plaintiff The Fouke Company has for approximately three years been purchasing the hides of American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) in the states of Louisiana and Florida, processing and tanning the hides therefrom in its plant in South Carolina, and selling them to fabricators located in various states other than the State of California.
Subsequent to the enactment of California Penal Code Sections 653o and 653r, The Fouke Company has offered, and it desires in the future to offer, processed alligator hides for sale directly to fabricators in California, including plaintiff Gary's Leather Creations, Inc. Fabricators of alligator products in various other states (who are customers of Fouke) also desire to sell alligator hides to wholesale dealers and retail dealers in the State of California for resale to consumers. No one is able to make sales to a California buyer because of said statutes. Wholesalers and retailers as well as fabricators in California know of said California Penal Code Sections and feel that they cannot purchase alligator products because of them. As a result, products of American alligator hides are not now sold or distributed in the State of California, resulting in economic loss and damage to Plaintiffs. Prior to the adoption of said Sections 653o and 653r, tanned and processed American alligator hides were regularly imported into California, fabricated into consumer products in California, and sold to customers within California.
The U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973 (87 Stat. 884 et seq., 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1543) was enacted to provide for conservation of domestic and endangered species of fish and wildlife through federal action and through cooperation with state endangered species conservation programs consistent with the federal law.
The Secretary of the Interior, acting on authority of said statutes, has issued detailed regulations with respect to the taking, buying, and tanning of the American alligator (alligator mississippiensis) and the fabricating of products therefrom. See 50 C.F.R. § 17.42. The Fouke Company holds a license, issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of Interior pursuant to said regulations, which authorizes Fouke, as a buyer, tanner, and fabricator of American alligator hides, to purchase, possess, sell or otherwise transfer, and ship (but not export) green and tanned hides and to manufacture said hides into various products.
Sec. 6(f) of the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973 16 U.S.C. § 1535(f) provides, under the heading "Conflicts Between...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Art & Antique Dealers League of Am., Inc. v. Seggos
...(9th Cir. 1983) (preemption clause applied in case involving Texas company seeking to sell products in California); Fouke Co. v. Brown , 463 F. Supp. 1142 (E.D. Cal. 1979) (preemption clause applied in case involving Delaware company seeking to sell alligator hides to California company).Pl......
-
Cresenzi Bird Importers, Inc. v. State of NY
...& Sons, Inc. v. Deukmejian, 702 F.2d 758 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 823, 104 S.Ct. 91, 78 L.Ed.2d 98 (1983); Fouke Co. v. Brown, 463 F.Supp. 1142 (E.D.Cal.1979). Defendant correctly answers that plaintiffs' licenses are not the "permits" or "exceptions" under § 1539 to which § 1535(......
-
April in Paris v. Becerra
...General Evelle J. Younger from enforcing Sections 653o and 653r against trade in American alligator parts. Fouke Co. v. Brown , 463 F. Supp. 1142 (E.D. Cal. 1979). At that time, the American alligator was classified as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 ("ESA"), and......
-
Los Altos Boots v. Bonta
...the state from enforcing its ban on alligator hides, and that injunction has never been lifted. See generally Fouke Co. v. Brown , 463 F. Supp. 1142 (E.D. Cal. 1979). In 1983, the Ninth Circuit affirmed judgments from this court and the United States District Court for the Northern District......
-
Environmental crimes.
...16 U.S.C. [section][section] 1531-1544 (2000). (603.) Id. [section] 1531(a). (604.) Id. [section] 1531(b); see also Fouke Co. v. Brown, 463 F. Supp. 1142, 1144 (E.D. Cal. 1979) (stating purpose of (605.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1533(a). (606.) See 50 C.F.R. [section] 424.01 (2007) (stating two ......
-
Environmental crimes.
...28, 1973, 87 Stat. 884). (568.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1531(a) (2000). (569.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1531(b); see also Fouke Co. v. Brown, 463 F. Supp. 1142, 1144 (E.D. Cal. 1979) (stating purpose of (570.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1533(a). (571.) See 50 C.F.R. [section] 424.01 (2005) (stating two age......
-
Environmental crimes.
...28, 1973, 87 Stat. 884). (574.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1531(a) (2000). (575.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1531(b); see also Fouke Co. v. Brown, 463 F. Supp. 1142, 1144 (E.D. Cal. 1979) (stating purpose of (576.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1533(a). (577.) See 50 C.F.R. [section] 424.01 (2005) (stating two age......
-
Environmental crimes.
...1531-1544). (594.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1531(a) (2006). (595.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1531(b); see also Fouke Co. v. Brown, 463 F. Supp. 1142, 1144 (E.D. Cal. 1979) (stating purpose of (596.) 16 U.S.C. [section] 1533(a) (2006). (597.) See 50 C.F.R. [section] 424.01 (2008) (stating two agencies ......