Payne v. State Kansas Brewster
| Decision Date | 09 December 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 49,49 |
| Citation | 63 L.Ed. 153,39 S.Ct. 32,248 U.S. 112 |
| Parties | PAYNE et al. v. STATE of KANSAS ex rel. BREWSTER, Atty. Gen |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Mr. Ray Campbell, of Wichita, Kan., for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. J. L. Hunt and James P. Coleman, both of Topeka, Kan., and T. F. Railsback, of Kansas City, Kan., for defendant in error.
The validity of chapter 371, Laws of Kansas 1915—'An act in relation to the sale of farm produce on commission'—is challenged by certain grain dealers carrying on business in that state. It forbids the sale of farm produce on commission without an annual license, to be procured from the State Board of Agriculture upon a proper showing as to character, responsibility, etc., and a bond conditioned to make honest accounting. A fee of $10 is required.
Plaintiffs in error maintain that the statute is class legislation which abridges their rights and privileges, that it deprives them of the equal protection of the laws and also of their property without due process of law—all in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Manifestly, the purpose of the state was to prevent certain evils incident to the business of commission merchants in farm products by regulating it. Many former opinions have pointed out the limitations upon powers of the states concerning matters of this kind and we think the present record fails to show that these limitations have been transcended. Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis, 240 U. S. 342, 36 Sup. Ct. 370, 60 L. Ed. 679, L. R. A. 1917A, 421, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 455; Brazee v. Michigan, 241 U. S. 340, 36 Sup. Ct. 561, 60 L. Ed. 1034, Ann Cas. 1917C, 522; Adams v. Tanner, 244 U. S. 590, 37 Sup. Ct. 662, 61 L. Ed. 1336, L. R. A. 1917F, 1163, Ann. Cas. ,1917D, 973.
The judgment of the court below is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v. Hayden
...controversies between rival litigants." State, ex rel. Brewster v. Mohler , 98 Kan. 465, 471, 158 P. 408 (1916), aff'd 248 U.S. 112, 39 S. Ct. 32, 63 L. Ed. 153 (1918). Having an actual controversy is key; an abstract controversy does not meet the constitutional standard because courts do n......
-
Jaarda v. Van Ommen
...to give bonds for honest accounting to prevent evils incident to the business of dealing in farm products. Payne v. Kansas, 248 U. S. 112, 39 S. Ct. 32, 63 L. Ed. 153.’ The Court of Appeals held (page 699 [4, 5-7] of 186 N. E., 262 N. Y. 259): ‘State courts should uphold state regulation wh......
-
Franklin v. State ex rel. Alabama State Milk Control Board
... ... laws for workmen on municipal contracts have been upheld ... Atkin v. Kansas, 191 U.S. 207, 24 S.Ct. 124, 48 ... L.Ed. 148; Austin v. City of New York, 258 N.Y ... 113, ... to the business of dealing in farm products. Payne v ... Kansas, 248 U.S. 112, 39 S.Ct. 32, 63 L.Ed. 153. *** ... "We ... are unable to ... ...
-
State ex rel. Tomasic v. Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kan.
...determine controversies between rival litigants." State, ex rel., v. Mohler, 98 Kan. 465, 471, 158 P. 408 (1916), aff'd 248 U.S. 112, 39 S.Ct. 32, 63 L.Ed. 153 (1918); see U.S.D. No. 380 v. McMillen, 252 Kan. 451, Syl. p 5, 845 P.2d 676 (1993) ("[t]he judiciary interprets, explains, and app......