Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co. held that the sections of a California statute which levied excises on sales of liquor in Yosemite National Park were enforceable in the Park, while sections of the same statute providing regulation of the Park liquor traffic through licenses were unenforceable. Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co. Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 304 U.S. 518 (1938), is a court case in which the appellee, the Yosemite Park and Curry Co., brought this suit to enjoin the California State Board of Equalization and the State Attorney General from enforcing the 'Alcoholic Beverage Control Act' of the State of
DNC Parks and Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. vs. The United States of America contractual rights. They characterized the park service's position as "taking Aramark's side." Delaware North also noted that payment would be made by Aramark, not the federal government. The same contract with the park service required that any successor to Delaware North would have to buy out its Yosemite-related assets at fair market prices. Indeed, when the government put the concession contract for Yosemite up for bid, the notices it published explicitly stated the winner would be required to purchase furniture, equipment, vehicles, and "other property." The National Park Service, by request of Delaware North, amended the bid notice to explicitly