## Facts

- Boise Cascade Corporation, doing business as Kingsberry Homes, manufactured prefabricated residential homes for construction in Gwinnett County, Georgia.
- Gwinnett County revamped its building code after earlier litigation and, in effect, adopted the Southern Standard Building Code as the county’s construction standards, with three minor amendments.
- The parties and the court treated the Southern Standard Building Code itself as a valid police-power safety regulation; the dispute focused on two amendments.
- One contested amendment required plywood roof decking to be at least 1/2 inch thick where ceiling joists were spaced more than 16 inches on center and plywood decking was used.
- A second contested amendment required all residential dwellings to have specified corner bracing (including a minimum 1/2-inch plywood corner brace or specified dimensional-lumber bracing options).
- Boise Cascade used 3/8-inch plywood roof decking grade-marked 24/0 in its prefabricated homes.
- Boise Cascade’s 3/8-inch, strength-rated plywood construction was permitted by the Southern Standard Building Code and also accepted under VA, FHA, and other recognized national standards.
- Evidence showed plywood standards had shifted from older thickness/species classifications to strength-based ratings (e.g., 12/0 through 48/24), and Boise Cascade’s decking met those strength-based standards even though it did not meet the county’s thickness requirement.
- The case was tried to the court on Boise Cascade’s request for injunctive relief against enforcement of the challenged amendments as an unreasonable exercise of the county’s police power.

## Issues

1. Whether Gwinnett County’s two contested amendments to an otherwise reasonable model building code were a reasonable exercise of the police power, meaning the public generally required them, they were reasonably necessary to achieve public-safety ends, and they were not unduly oppressive.
2. Whether the county could enforce thickness-based decking and prescribed corner-bracing requirements that departed from widely accepted model and national standards without a sufficient showing that the departures were needed for public safety.

## Decision

- The court held that the two challenged amendments failed the required reasonableness limits on the police power.
- The court found Boise Cascade’s construction methods were allowed by the Southern Standard Building Code and other recognized national standards, and the county did not justify the stricter local requirements as reasonably necessary for public safety.
- The court concluded the amendments imposed undue burdens on Boise Cascade, functioning as oppressive restrictions on a particular class of builder without an adequate public-wide necessity showing.
- The court granted injunctive relief, enjoining enforcement of the challenged amendments against Boise Cascade.

## Legal Principles

- Police-power regulations affecting property and business must be reasonable: the public generally (not merely a particular class) must require the regulation, the regulation must be reasonably necessary to accomplish its protective purpose, and it must not be unduly oppressive.
- A local government may adopt a standard building code as a safety measure, but additional amendments must still satisfy constitutional reasonableness limits when they go beyond what the model code and recognized national standards require.
- When a county’s technical building requirements conflict with model-code provisions and widely used national construction standards, the county bears a meaningful burden to show the stricter rule is justified by public-safety needs rather than preference or class-based restriction.
- A regulation that significantly increases compliance burdens while offering no demonstrated material safety benefit may be enjoined as arbitrary or oppressive under substantive due process limits on the police power.

## Conclusion

Boise Cascade Corp. v. Gwinnett County held that although Gwinnett County could rely on the Southern Standard Building Code as a reasonable safety measure, two extra county amendments—requiring 1/2-inch plywood decking in certain roof applications and mandating specified corner bracing—were not shown to be reasonably necessary for public safety and were unduly burdensome on Boise Cascade’s nationally approved prefabricated-home construction, so the court enjoined their enforcement against the company.


Boise Cascade Corp. v. Gwinnett County, 272 F. Supp. 847 (1967)