Sun Oil Co. v. Director of Division on Necessaries of Life

Decision Date07 January 1960
Citation340 Mass. 235,163 N.E.2d 276,89 A.L.R.2d 896
Parties, 89 A.L.R.2d 896 SUN OIL COMPANY v. DIRECTOR OF DIVISION ON NECESSARIES OF LIFE.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Donald R. Grant, Boston, for plaintiff.

Joseph H. Elcock, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen. (Eugene G. Panarese, Chelsea, with him), for defendant.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, COUNIHAN, WHITTEMORE and CUTTER, JJ.

WHITTEMORE, Justice.

The plaintiff seeks a declaration under G.L. c. 231A that signs which are in use or are proposed for use at gasoline filling stations of its retail dealers, and which refer to blended gasoline sold thereat under its trade mark Sunoco, or to the dispensing pumps, do not violate G.L. c. 94, § 295C, as appearing in St.1939, c. 459, § 1.

The case was reserved and reported by a single justice upon the pleadings and a statement of agreed facts. A prayer for an alternative declaration of the invalidity of § 295C to any extent applicable has been waived.

Section 295C is one of several sections of a statute whose purpose is to prevent fraud in the sale of motor fuel. Slome v. Chief of Police of Fitchburg, 304 Mass. 187, 189, 23 N.E.2d 133. Section 295C provides: 'Every retail dealer in motor fuel shall publicly display and maintain on each pump or other dispensing device from which motor fuel is sold by him, at least one sign and not more than two signs stating the price per gallon of the motor fuel sold by him from such pump or device. Said sign or signs shall be of a size not larger than eight inches by ten inches. The price shown on each of such signs shall include all taxes imposed with respect to the manufacture or sale of the motor fuel sold at such pump or device, and every such sign shall either contain a statement of the taxes included in said price, or, without specifying the amount thereof, shall state that such taxes are included in said price. All figures, including fractions, upon said signs, other than figures and fractions used in any price computing mechanism constituting a part of any such pump or dispensing device, shall be of the same size.

[p] No signs stating or relating to the price of motor fuel, and no signs designed or calculated to cause the public to believe that they state or relate to the price of motor fuel, other than the signs referred to in the preceding paragraph and required to be displayed upon pumps and other dispensing devices, shall be posted or displayed on or about the premises where motor fuel is sold at retail, and within view of any public highway or reservation.'

The dispensing pump to which the signs relate is adjustable if desired so as to blend in its nozzle, with gasoline of a standard octane rating, a predetermined amount of other gasoline or 'octane concentrate' which has a high octane rating. Thus a single pump and two storage tanks make possible the delivery to each customer of gasoline which has an octane rating deemed suited to the compression ratio of the engine of his automobile. As presently used the pumps deliver the standard gasoline and five blends.

The signs which the defendant deems violative of § 295C read as follows: 'New Thrifty 6 Fuels Custom Blended'; 'Miracle Pump 6 Thrifty Fuels'; 'New! Thriftier Custom-Blended' (with picture of the pump); 'Custom Blended At The Pump New * * * Thriftier! Exact Octane To Fit Your Car'; 'Miracle Blending Pump links up: Power Thrift Custom-Blended at the Pump'; 'Custom Blending Pay Only For The Octane You Need!'

The plaintiff's counsel at the argument said that it does not ask a declaration in respect of the 'Pay Only' sign. We think that, unless there is assurance that all controversy in respect of this, and similar, signs is ended, we should construe the 'Pay Only' sign. Its status being, in our view, like that of the others we do construe it without deciding the right to or effect of the withdrawal of an issue by only one party.

We hold that the signs are not signs 'stating or relating to the price of motor fuel' or signs 'designed or calculated to cause the public to believe that they state or relate to the price of motor fuel' within the meaning of these words in G.L. c. 94, § 295C.

The 'price of motor fuel' is the number of currency units for which a unit of fuel is sold. A dictionary definition of 'thrifty' is, 'Given to, or evincing, thrift; characterized by economy and good management; provident.' It is true that the purchase of a fuel will be thrifty if its cost is less than that of another fuel which in performance is identical with it. But these statements do not make that claim. If the use of the word 'thrift' alone would justify an inference of reference to price, such inference is extinguished in the signs by disclosure of the basis for the claim. The 'thrift' signs say in effect that 'buying our custom blended gasoline' or 'buying gasoline dispensed in our miracle pump' is a thrifty practice. The 'Pay Only' sign says in effect: 'buying custom blended fuel means that you pay only for the octane you need.' Such statements are equally applicable whatever prices prevail for standard and higher grades of fuel.

These signs inform customers who need gasoline of higher octane rating than standard that their expenditures for motor fuel, that is, their fuel costs, may be less than at competitive pumps which sell only a single high test fuel. Such fuel cost to the customer is what these signs, and in particular the 'Pay Only' sign, refer to. This, however, is not in any...

To continue reading

Request your trial
38 cases
  • Mobil Oil Corp. v. Attorney General
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • March 15, 1972
    ...enforcement of a criminal statute does not preclude us from rendering a declaratory decree. Sun Oil Co. v. Director of the Div. on the Necessaries of Life, 340 Mass. 235, 239, 163 N.E.2d 276. Commonwealth v. Baird, 355 Mass. 746, 755, 247 N.E.2d 574. From the viewpoint of the public prosecu......
  • Suffolk Const. v. Capital Asset Management
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • July 13, 2007
    ... ... 449 Mass. 444 ... SUFFOLK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC ... DIVISION OF CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT ... Supreme Judicial Court of ... See Sun Oil Co. v. Director of Div. on Necessaries of Life, 340 Mass. 235, 238, 163 N.E.2d 276 ... ...
  • Bettencourt v. Bettencourt
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • May 31, 1972
    ...declaratory relief under G.L. c. 231A. That chapter (see § 9) is to be construed broadly. See Sun Oil Co. v. Director of the Div. on the Necessaries of Life, 340 Mass. 235, 239, 163 N.E.2d 276; NORWELL V. HARTFORD ACC. & IND. CO., MASS., 265 N.E.2D 915.A See also Magoun v. Liberty Mut. Ins.......
  • Meehan v. Med. Info. Tech., Inc.
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • January 20, 2021
    ...Local 509 v. Department of Mental Health, 476 Mass. 51, 57, 63 N.E.3d 1097 (2016), quoting Sun Oil Co. v. Director of the Div. on the Necessaries of Life, 340 Mass. 235, 238, 163 N.E.2d 276 (1960).The majority's citation to Parker v. North Brookfield, 68 Mass. App. Ct. 235, 240-243, 861 N.E......
  • 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