Case involving alcohol law allowing in-state distilleries shipping direct to citizens and prohibiting out-of-state distilleries from doing the same allowed to proceed after direct comparison to Granholm.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
5M ago
In a classic Granholm v. Heald situation involving a lack of parity between in-state and out-of-state distilleries, Washington state allows in-state distilleries the privileges of direct sale and shipment of their liquors to Washington residents and restricts out-of-state distilleries from doing the same. Under the Washington laws for alcohol production and sale, Washington distilleries can act as a retailer of their products (and those of other distilleries) if they abide by retailer rules – primarily – maintaining a physical presence in the state. Distilleries that have a physical retail loc ..read more
Visit website
Court finds statute barring retailer warehouse storage out of jurisdiction of alcoholic beverage control authority does not violate Dormant Commerce Clause. Finally, a Tennessee Wine case that is NOT about direct wine shipping.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
6M ago
We will look back to find that the greatest result of Tennessee Wine’s “test” allowing “each State leeway to enact the measures that its citizens believe are appropriate to address the public health and safety effects of alcohol use and to serve other legitimate interests” comes from the ability of lower courts to kick the idea around for a while and see what happens and what comes up before ever needing the Supreme Court to address the issue again. 139 S. Ct. 2449, 2474. Taken at face value, it certainly means that public health and safety impacts of alcohol related laws – when those impacts ..read more
Visit website
The Tennessee Wine Test? 6th Circuit falls in line with requiring evidence of out-of-state alcohol shipping restriction’s health and safety benefits in order to surmount a Dormant Commerce Clause challenge. The State says it wants to take the matter to the Supreme Court.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
7M ago
“However, the Court in Lebamoff did not hold that direct ship restrictions are always constitutional. The concurring opinion, which had the support of a majority of the panel, emphasized that the Court upheld Michigan’s statute because “the plaintiffs ha[d] not sufficiently refuted” the defendant’s evidence indicating that the challenged statute “serves the public health.”  In an opinion limiting its prior Lebamoff decision to the facts, the 6th Circuit has denied an en banc rehearing in its Block v. Canepa case leading the State of Ohio to request a stay of the mandate to remand for fu ..read more
Visit website
1st Circuit closes ranks with those Circuits reading Tennessee Wine as requiring States prove alcohol laws discriminating against out-of-state interests affect health or safety goals or other legitimate interests
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
7M ago
The Circuits are by and large falling into line regarding the implications and procedures of Tennessee Wine when Dormant Commerce Clause challenges are brought against State alcohol-related laws and regulations. They are rejecting the notion that a summary dismissal of challenges is acceptable and requiring a fact-finding assessment involving evidence greater than conclusory assertions made by “experts” regarding the health and safety effects of laws and regulations. Governments need to present evidence showing that their statutes create the stated effects, and those challenging statutes are a ..read more
Visit website
Court rejects wine supplier’s attempt to dismiss wine distributor’s lawsuit for improper termination and reasonable compensation finding termination for lack of prompt payment and assertions of improper credit require factual determination.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
1y ago
A Michigan Federal Court has ruled that the motion to dismiss stage is no place to test the merits of claims that a wine supplier’s termination of a distribution agreement with a wine distributor.  Cana Distributors, a Michigan based wholesaler of wine, sued PortoVino, a supplier of wine (link to complaint), alleging that PortoVino’s termination of their distribution agreement violated MCL §436.1305, Michigan’s statute detailing rights and remedies for the termination of wine distribution agreements. Cana asserted that PortoVino should have paid reasonable compensation for the diminished ..read more
Visit website
The 9th Circuit will be deciding whether Washington’s beer franchise law allows a supplier to terminate without cause and the case may provide some important precedent.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
1y ago
A Court’s grant of an injunction to a beer distributor prohibiting Constellation from moving its brands to a new wholesaler in Washington State has set the stage for a fully briefed and soon to be argued 9th Circuit case that is certain to set an important precedent for interpreting state beer franchise laws. That’s because the titular question, does the Washington state beer franchise law (RCW Chapter 19.126) allow a brewer or other supplier to terminate a distribution agreement without good cause provided they pay fair (or “just”) compensation, is being argued mainly from the point of statut ..read more
Visit website
Valuable insight on packaging design and labeling offered in Court’s dismissal of claims that hard seltzer conveyed the impression it contained tequila. Saying “Margarita Hard Seltzer” is not the same as saying  “Sparkling Margarita” or “Margarita Cocktail.”
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
1y ago
Context is crucial. That’s the takeaway from this recent opinion out of a New York Federal Court dismissing consumer claims asserting that Coca Cola’s 12-pack Topo Chico branded Margarita Hard Seltzer packaging misleads consumers to thinking the product contains tequila and is made from Mexican mineral water. This opinion provides excellent information and analysis for those looking to further assess their packaging and understand what may cross a line and what should not in creating hard seltzer branding for those seltzers meant to taste like popular cocktails. The claims the plaintiff raised ..read more
Visit website
Court provides stark reminder to liquor and beer distributors about why FOB terms matter: the location of title transfer or sale can determine whether you have franchise protection thanks to the Dormant Commerce Clause.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
1y ago
In a recent opinion showing the 21st Amendment and state franchise laws must work within the confines of the Commerce Clause a New York federal court has granted a second motion to dismiss the complaint of a New York beer importer and wholesaler finding that because sale of the beer (transfer of title and payment) took place outside New York, the state franchise law did not apply and could not help the wholesaler keep the rights to distribute the beer when a new importer started importing and selling the beer to other wholesalers in the state. We previously wrote about this case, Amtec Interna ..read more
Visit website
The Illinois Craft Brewers Guild “Beer Omnibus” bill contains some excellent advancements for bars, restaurants, wineries, distilleries and not-for-profits. With commentary.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
1y ago
Experience guides the law and the development of workable statutes is no exception to the idea that a society’s legislation should be reviewed and updated often as times change and circumstances reveal what works and what doesn’t.  Illinois Senate Bill 2216 and the companion House Bill 3423 provide keen and reasoned approaches to this method of lawmaking looking to proceed with some small advancement that will benefit Illinois brewers as well as Illinois bars, restaurants and not for profits. The bills, pressed as part of this congressional session provide for the following advancements o ..read more
Visit website
Court rules beer franchise law may not apply to foreign breweries (and their beer) where wholesaler did not engage with foreign breweries or implicate them in contracting with their U.S. importer for distribution.
Libation Law Blog
by Ashley Brandt
1y ago
In a lesson for beer distributors in contracting with importers of foreign beer, a Federal Court recently denied an injunction to a beer wholesaler looking to keep two Belgian breweries, Brouwerij 3 Fonteinen and De La Senne in its portfolio after a new importer started importing the beers and began selling them to a different beer distributor in the territory in Ohio. The facts asserted in the memorandum from the Court detail the history of how the brands came to be with a new importer. The beer distributor, Cavalier Distributing, distributed both lambic brands prior to 2020 through a relatio ..read more
Visit website

Follow Libation Law Blog on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR