Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)

Citation
Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Parent Document
Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
1976-06-16

Other Sections in This Document (374)

Full Text

831 chars
297 U.S. 251 [56 Sup. Ct. 453, 80 L.Ed. 669].) It is true that in these cases the United States Supreme Court emphasized the emergency nature of the legislation. The emergency referred to was in fact part of the background of the statutes. In determining judicial action, however, the character of the situation sought to be remedied rather than its abruptness is the governing factor. As we interpret the Nebbia case and the cases from this court hereafter referred to, in passing upon the validity of such statutes the sole constitutional yardstick by which they should be measured is the necessity for and the reasonableness of the regulation. The question as to whether the statute involves direct or indirect price fixing is a false quantity.” (Wholesale T. Dealers v. National etc. Co., supra, 11 Cal.2d at pp. 654-655.) *159