95-3304,95-3304 | 3rd Cir. | Jul 31, 1996
Before: NYGAARD, SAROKIN and ALDISERT, Circuit Judges. (Opinion Filed: July 31, 1996) Marvin Beshore Milspaw & Beshore 130 Locust Street P.O. Box 946 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0946 Attorney for Appellees SANI-DAIRY, a division of Penn Traffic Co., Inc., JOHN P. STRITTMATTER, dba Strittmatters Dairy,
DELBERT THOMAS, ED THOMAS,
LOWELL FRIEDLIN, ARTHUR
BLOOM, JAMES L. HARTEIS
Glen W. Wagner 3858 North Cliff Road Port Clinton, OH 43452 Attorney for Appellee
MILK MARKETING, INC.
Edward R. Cohen United States Department of Justice 10th & Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 Attorney for Appellants
OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM.
Several Pennsylvania dairy farmers and a dairy cooperative challenge the validity of the Secretary of Agriculture's regulations governing the marketing of fluid milk in the New York-New Jersey milk marketing area. Plaintiffs allege that the Secretary's regulations, promulgated under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, 7 U.S.C. (cid:1) 601 et seq., violate 7 U.S.C. (cid:1) 608c(5)(G), which states: No marketing agreement or order applicable to milk and its products in any marketing area shall prohibit or in any manner limit, in the case of the products of milk, the marketing in that area of any milk or product thereof produced in any production area in the United States. The district court found that the Secretary's regulations governing the marketing of fluid milk in the New York-New Jersey milk marketing area, as applied to plaintiffs, constituted a prohibited economic trade barrier to milk producers and sellers outside the New York-New Jersey milk marketing area. See Lehigh Valley Cooperative Farmers, Inc. v. United States, 370 U.S. 76" date_filed="1962-06-04" court="SCOTUS" case_name="Lehigh Valley Cooperative Farmers, Inc. v. United States">370 U.S. 76, 91-98, 82 S. Ct. 1168" date_filed="1962-06-04" court="SCOTUS" case_name="Lehigh Valley Cooperative Farmers, Inc. v. United States">82 S.Ct. 1168, 1175-1180 (1962). The district court awarded plaintiffs restitution and interest. We will now affirm, and in so doing adopt the reasoning of the district court expressed in Sani-Dairy v. Yeutter, F.Supp. , No. CIV.A.90-222J, 1995 WL 848950" date_filed="1995-03-27" court="W.D. Pa." case_name="Sani-Dairy v. Yeutter">1995 WL 848950 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 27, 1995) and Sani- Dairy v. Espy, F.Supp. , NO. CIV.A. 90-222J, CIV.A. 90- 236J, 1993 WL 832147" date_filed="1993-12-30" court="W.D. Pa." case_name="SANI-DAIRY, a DIV. OF PENN TRAFFIC CO. v. Espy">1993 WL 832147 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 30, 1993).