Stowers v. Ohio Dept. of Agriculture
2011 Ohio 2710
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Manna Storehouse, LLC, owned by John and Jacqueline Stowers, operates from the Stowers’ home in Lorain County as a family business.
- Manna sells food and related items to about one hundred members who join by paying a fee, completing an application, and an interview.
- Orders are placed by members and fulfilled from suppliers, primarily United Natural Foods; some items are transported in the Stowers’ unrefrigerated vehicles and stored in Manna rooms.
- Prices are marked up for profit, with members paying cash, and Manna collects sales tax on taxable items; profits are used to support the Stowers family.
- In December 2008, law-enforcement executed a search warrant on the Manna rooms and seized products as part of an investigation into unlicensed retail food establishment operations under Ohio law.
- Appellants filed suit seeking, among other things, a declaration that R.C. 3717.21 (licensing) is unconstitutional as applied, return of seized property, injunctive relief, and attorney fees; the trial court granted summary judgment for appellees on most claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Manna is a retail food establishment requiring licensure | Stowers argues Manna is not a retail food establishment under R.C. 3717.21 | ODA/LCGHD contend Manna is a retail food establishment and must be licensed | Manna is a retail food establishment and must be licensed |
| Whether R.C. 3717 is constitutional as applied to Manna | Stowers assert due process and equal protection violations in application to Manna | State argues rational-basis review supports licensing to protect public health | R.C. 3717 is constitutional as applied |
Key Cases Cited
- Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson, 116 Ohio St.3d 468 (2007-Ohio-6948) (due process equal protection equivalence to US standards; defer to legislative judgments)
- Benjamin v. City of Columbus, 167 Ohio St.103 (1957) (police power restraints; rational basis review applicability)
- Craigmiles v. Giles, 312 F.3d 220 (6th Cir. 2002) (equal protection challenges to licensing; risk-based regulation)
- Merrifield v. Lockyer, 547 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2008) (licensing exemptions must bear rational relation to legitimate interests)
- Williamson v. Lee Optical, 348 U.S. 483 (1955) (licensing regulation may be rationally related to public welfare)
- United States Railway Association v. Fritz, 449 U.S. 166 (1980) (rational basis and government regulation deference principles)
- City of New Orleans v. Dukes, 427 U.S. 297 (1976) (rational basis in local economic regulation)
- Fed. Communications Comm. v. Beach Communications, Inc., 508 U.S. 307 (1993) (rational-basis standard; regulation can be sustained with plausible rationale)
- Moore Personnel Servs., Inc. v. Zaino, 98 Ohio St.3d 337 (2003-Ohio-1089) (statutory interpretation and ordinary meaning; proper interpretive approach)