TRANSPORTATION OF DAIRY GOODS BY FARMER-OWNED MOTOR VEHICLES
Property transportation permit not required for vehicle owned by farmers' partnership where used solely for transportation of dairy products from farm to central purchase point.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
September 13, 1951
Washington Public Service Commission
Olympia, Washington Cite as: AGO 51-53 No. 128
Attention: Honorable Joseph Starin, Commissioner
We have your request for an opinion upon the following matter:
Is a motor vehicle jointly owned by dairy farmers for the sole purpose of transporting milk from their several farms to a central purchase point exempt from the permit requirements of chapter 184, Laws of 1935, as amended?
This question is answered in the affirmative.
You have advised us that a group of dairy farmers contemplate forming a partnership in order to purchase a truck for the purpose of transporting milk from their farms to a central purchase point. You inquire whether, under such circumstances, the transporting vehicle would be exempt from the permit requirements of chapter 184, Laws of 1935, as amended.
Section 3, chapter 184, Laws of 1935 (Rem. Rev. Stat. § 6382-3) provides, in part, as follows:
"The provisions of this act, except where specifically otherwise provided, and except the provisions providing for licenses, shall not apply to:
[[Orig. Op. Page 2]]
"(e) Motor vehicles owned and operated by farmers in the transportation of their own farm, orchard or dairy products from point of production to market, or in the infrequent or seasonal transportation by one farmer for another in his immediate neighborhood of products of the farm, orchard or dairy, or of supplies or commodities to be used on the farm, orchard or dairy."
InKnutzen v. Truck Insurance Exchange, 199 Wash. 4, 90 P. (2d) 282, the court, incidental to determining liability under an insurance policy, held it was not necessary that the owner of a dairy farm who delivered milk from his farm to customers in a nearby city have a permit to transport property for compensation, required by section 5, chapter 184, Laws of 1935.
Under the conditions which you have outlined above, such vehicle would clearly be within the exception of section 3 (e). The exemption is no less applicable because the operator is to be a partnership rather than an individual. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the contemplated operation described above is exempt from the permit provisions of chapter 184, Laws of 1935, as amended.
It should be noted that such operations are subject, however, to the special license requirements of section 12, chapter 269, Laws of 1951.
Very truly yours,
LAWRENCE K. McDONELL
Assistant Attorney General