FEDERAL · 7 U.S.C. · Chapter SUBCHAPTER III—STOCKYARDS AND STOCKYARD DEALERS

Prevention of unfair, discriminatory, or deceptive practices

7 U.S.C. § 213
Title7Agriculture
ChapterSUBCHAPTER III—STOCKYARDS AND STOCKYARD DEALERS

This text of 7 U.S.C. § 213 (Prevention of unfair, discriminatory, or deceptive practices) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
7 U.S.C. § 213.

Text

(a)It shall be unlawful for any stockyard owner, market agency, or dealer to engage in or use any unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive practice or device in connection with determining whether persons should be authorized to operate at the stockyards, or with the receiving, marketing, buying, or selling on a commission basis or otherwise, feeding, watering, holding, delivery, shipment, weighing, or handling of livestock.
(b)Whenever complaint is made to the Secretary by any person, or whenever the Secretary has reason to believe, that any stockyard owner, market agency, or dealer is violating the provisions of subsection (a), the Secretary after notice and full hearing may make an order that he shall cease and desist from continuing such violation to the extent that the Secretar

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Butz v. Glover Livestock Commission Co.
411 U.S. 182 (Supreme Court, 1973)
407 case citations
Been v. O.K. Industries, Inc.
495 F.3d 1217 (Tenth Circuit, 2007)
201 case citations
Mattes v. United States
721 F.2d 1125 (Seventh Circuit, 1983)
26 case citations
Washington Gas Light Co. v. Public Service Commission
982 A.2d 691 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2009)
26 case citations
United States v. Joey Haun
124 F.3d 745 (Sixth Circuit, 1997)
23 case citations
United States v. Marvin D. Lehman
887 F.2d 1328 (Seventh Circuit, 1989)
16 case citations
Jeffrey C. Ferguson v. United States Department of Agriculture
911 F.2d 1273 (Eighth Circuit, 1990)
12 case citations
Excel Corp. v. United States Department of Agriculture
397 F.3d 1285 (Tenth Circuit, 2005)
11 case citations
Fairbank v. Hardin
429 F.2d 264 (Ninth Circuit, 1970)
9 case citations
Syverson v. United States Department of Agriculture
601 F.3d 793 (Eighth Circuit, 2010)
6 case citations
Schumacher v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc.
434 F. Supp. 2d 748 (D. South Dakota, 2006)
6 case citations
Farrow v. United States Department of Agriculture
760 F.2d 211 (Eighth Circuit, 1985)
4 case citations
United States v. Ocala Live Stock Market, Inc.
861 F. Supp. 2d 1328 (M.D. Florida, 2012)
1 case citations

Source Credit

History

(Aug. 15, 1921, ch. 64, title III, §312, 42 Stat. 167; Pub. L. 85–909, §2(5), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1750; Pub. L. 90–446, §1(e), July 31, 1968, 82 Stat. 475; Pub. L. 94–410, §3, Sept. 13, 1976, 90 Stat. 1249.)

Editorial Notes

Editorial Notes

Amendments
1976—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 94–410, §3(a), (c), struck out "in commerce" after "or handling" and substituted "livestock" for "live stock".
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 94–410, §3(b), inserted provisions dealing with authority of Secretary to assess a civil penalty for violations and, upon failure to pay, procedure for recovery of such penalty.
1968—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 90–446 inserted "determining whether persons should be authorized to operate at stockyards, or with" after "in connection with".
1958—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 85–909 struck out "at a stockyard" after "in commerce".

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 U.S.C. § 213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/7/213.