97.176 Butter; grading; label.
(1) It is unlawful to sell, offer or expose for sale, or have in possession with intent to sell, any butter at retail unless it has been graded. Butter shall be graded as follows:
(a) Grade, Wisconsin, AA — 93 score;
(b) Grade, Wisconsin, A — 92 score;
(c) Grade, Wisconsin, B — 91-90 score;
(d) Grade, Wisconsin, undergrade — all butter below Wisconsin B.
(2) United States AA, A, and B grades shall be accepted in lieu of the corresponding Wisconsin AA, A, and B grades, but all United States grades below B shall, for the purpose of this section, correspond to Wisconsin undergrade.
(3) As used in this section, score or grade means the grading of butter by its examination for flavor and aroma, body and texture, color, salt, package and by the use of other tests or procedures approved by the department for ascertaining the quality of butter in whole or in part.
(4) Details for methods and procedures to be used for ascertaining quality, for labeling, and for arbitrating disputes with respect to grades, shall be developed by the department as a result of public hearings to be held at a convenient location in the state.
(5) Butter from outside of the state sold within the state shall be provided with a label which indicates that it complies with the state grade standards as provided in this section and which indicates the grade in a manner equivalent to the requirements for butter manufactured and sold within the state.
(6) Butter that carries the state grade labels shall be graded by butter graders licensed under s. 97.175.
(7) No person, for himself or herself, or as an agent, shall advertise the sale of any butter at a stated price, unless the grade of the butter is set forth in such advertisement in not less than 10-point type.
History: 1977 c. 29 s. 1650m (4); 1983 a. 131 s. 2; Stats. 1983 s. 97.176; 1991 a. 39; 1993 a. 492.
Wisconsin's butter-grading law does not violate the due process clause, the equal protection clause, or the dormant commerce clause. This section is rationally related to the state's legitimate interest in consumer protection and does not discriminate against out-of-state businesses. Minerva Dairy, Inc. v. Harsdorf, 905 F.3d 1047 (2018).
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.