PETA loses = always a good start to any day...
Posted on 01/13/2005 3:26:26 PM PST by berkeleybeej
California's "Happy Cows" ads might be fairly cheesy, but that doesn't mean the state can be sued over them.
On Tuesday, San Francisco's 1st District Court of Appeal declared the California Milk Producers Advisory Board exempt from the state's false advertising laws, preventing People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc. from suing the agency over its popular campaign showing blissful bovines in a pastoral paradise.
PETA, based in Norfolk, Va., had claimed that the ads were "explicitly and implicitly untrue, deceptive and misleading" -- that California cows actually lead harsh lives in grubby fields before being slaughtered.
In their ruling, the appellate justices made no comment about the state of cattle contentment but simply held that a "plain reading" of the state's unfair competition law -- Business & Professions Code §17200 -- shows that public entities, such as the milk board, aren't subject to false advertising suits.
"Section 17201 does not include any references to governmental agencies or political entities," Justice Ignazio Ruvolo wrote. "Had the Legislature wished to include governmental entities, such as the CMAB, in its definition of 'person[s]' subject to UCL liability, it would have done so."
The ruling, in which Justices J. Anthony Kline and Paul Haerle concurred, made no finding about the ads' truthfulness.
PETA had asked the courts to block the ads, which portray dairy cows enjoying life under sunny skies in green pastures surrounded by white picket fences. The ads end with an announcer intoning: "Great cheese comes from happy cows. Happy cows come from California."
PETA claims that's a lie. It claims that California cows live in feces-soaked dirt lots devoid of vegetation and are milked straight through pregnancies, after which their calves are packed in crates and sold as veal.
The appeal court's ruling affirms San Francisco Superior Court Judge David Garcia, who dismissed the suit in 2003. Like the appeal court, Garcia based his decision on California Medical Association v. Regents of the University of California, 79 Cal.App.4th 542, a 2000 2nd District ruling that said a public entity is not a person subject to suit within the meaning of the UCL.
The appeal court also noted that while the state Legislature included governmental entities in the Unfair Practices Act of 1941, it didn't include them in the UCL, enacted in 1977.
The justices also agreed with another 2nd District ruling that held it would be an infringement of sovereign power for the milk board to be subject to suit under the UCL for a promotional campaign. They noted, however, that the plain language of the statute was enough to resolve the conflict without addressing the sovereign power issue.
As they did during oral arguments, the justices pointed out in the ruling that PETA could have filed a complaint with the director of the state's Department of Food and Agriculture. The director could have held an administrative hearing, they said, or referred the complaint to the attorney general, if necessary.
Matthew Penzer, PETA's legal counsel, couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday. But San Francisco-based Deputy Attorney General Tiffany Yee, who argued the case for the state, called the outcome a "very good ruling."
"The court was correct by declining to expand 17200's reach to include the state," she said, "and by recognizing the state's ability to promote its economy even if somebody might disagree with what the state says."
The ruling is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc. v. California Milk Producers Advisory Board, 05 C.D.O.S. 277.
Dear PETA,
As I read this article, I enjoyed a triple-heart-attack Fuddrucker hamburger with dripping cheese & bacon, a ribeye steak, and a huge glass of lip-smacking milk.
Dang, them animals sure are tasty!
Not bad looking, if not very bright.
Please tell me that PETA got stuck having to pay the lawyer bills for the defense. Please, oh pretty please!
Got that right! To me, PETA stands for People Eating Tasty Animals!
I have a question for PETA: "If man wasn't meant to eat animals, they why are they made out of meat?"
I don't think cows can talk.
Can I sue?
Of course. If they didn't, a lot of personal injury lawyers would be out of work.
Is that April Winchell as one of the cows?
So who's to say about a bunch of cows. Not that I think dairy cows are treated this way, but perhaps the feedlot cows enjoy standing in mud and filth all day. After all, they do get all the food they can eat. As someone who's had to use the public browsing computers at the library and seen the websites left on the screen by the previous users, there are some people out there who seem to enjoy conditions far worse than those cows endure (Yecchhh - It's getting so I hate using public computers more than public restrooms).
That's been my experience with cows. Give them fresh, clean, dry bedding, and they will head for the biggest pile of $hit they can find to lay in.....
I love those commercials! I always laugh at the one where the two bulls are trying to snag some cows. "The wingman doesn't talk!"
LOL... My favorite is the braveheart one.
I have another comment for PETA. I didn't climb to the top of the food chain just to become a vegetarian!!
Just seen the one where the cows are talking, and one (Sadie) has made a break for it, she's headed for California. Been gone 2 days and still in sight......(headwind, ya know)
It must have been a happy one
Yes, it is Paul's darling daughter as one of the cows!
Libertarians in election after election get only a tiny percentage of the votes. Yet it never occurs to them that the public is rejecting their beliefs.
But the fact is, American voters do not buy what the libertarians are trying to sell them. That never discourages the Libertarians in the least.
Libertarians and LIberals share the same belief.. Both groups believe that if the voters knew where thy stood, they would get a majority of the votes.
They never ever figure it out. The voters know what they are selling, the public is justt buying it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.