Court Opinion

ID: 9653158
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:39:51.516338+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:56.676665
License: Public Domain

STEPHENSON, Justice,
concurring.
I agree that the practices of the Commission, as applied to Kroger in this situation, are clearly arbitrary in violation of Section 2 of the Kentucky Constitution. The opinion should stop there. The milk-marketing statute in its ostensible purpose, in my view, is constitutional. The express purpose is to forbid sales below cost for the purpose of injuring competitors, destroying competition, or of creating a monopoly. These are valid and constitutional reasons for state action in this field. Accordingly, I disagree with so much of the majority opinion as declares the statute itself unconstitutional. We should decide this case on the arbitrary practices of the Commission, which is the only issue presented.
AKER and GANT, JJ., join in this concurring opinion.