Current Lawsuits
KENTUCKY
Tannins of Indianapolis v. Taylor (Western District Federal Court of Kentucky, Louisville Division)
Kentucky law allows its retailers to ship wine and spirits directly to Kentucky residents, yet bars the same from out-of-state retailers. Tannins, an Indianapolis retailer is suing the state of Kentucky. STATUS: Briefs have been filed in the case and we are awaiting a decision from the Judge on Summary Judgement.
ILLINOIS
Lebamoff Enterprises et al. v. O’Connell (United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division)
Filed in 2016 in Illinois Federal District Court, this case was originally dismissed on the grounds that Lebamoff Enterprises, an Indiana retailer barred from shipping to Illinoisans, was challenging the validity of the "Three Tier System", which the judge ruled could not be challenged due to its "unquestionably legitimate" status according to the Supreme Court and due to the fact, in the Judge's opinion, the Granholm v Heald Supreme Court decision only applies to producers of alcohol, while retailers may be discriminated against in state law. The case was appealed up to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. In that ruling, Chief Judge Diane Wood found the Illinois ban to be discriminatory and in response to the argument that Granholm's non-discrimination principles did not apply to wine retailers replied in her decision, "we are not persueded." STATUS: The case was remanded back to the original District Court where it was originally dismissed. There will be arguments presented in the case at the District Court and the judge will take his lead from the comments made by Chief Judge Wood in the Seven Circuit Court of Appeals.
INDIANA
Chicago Wine Co. v Holcomb (Federal District Court of the Southern Division of Indiana)
Chicago Wine Company, a well established vendor of fine and rare wine, sued Indiana where in-state retailers may ship wine to residents, but out-of-state retailers may not. STATUS: The case is in its early stages with cross motions for summary judgement filed by Chicago Wine Company and the State of Indiana.
MISSOURI
Sarasota Wine Market et al. v. Schmitt (Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Missouri, which recently rescinded the right of out-of-state retailers to ship into the state, now bars that practice, while allowing its own retailers to ship to Missouri residents. Sarasota Wine Market in Florida sued the state claiming the law violates the non-discrimination principles outlined in the 2005 Granholm Supreme Court decision. The Federal District Court disagreed and dismissed the case ruling for the state. The case was appealed to the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals. In the interim, the Supreme Court ruled in Tennessee Wine v Thomas that the non-discrimination principles of Granholm DID apply to retailers as well as wineries. STATUS: Oral arguments at the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals will occur on September 24, 2020.
NEW JERSEY
Freeman v Graziano (U.S. District Court of New Jersey)
New Jersey allows its retailers to ship wine to New Jersey residents but bars out-of-state retailers from doing the same. STATUS: The case is moving slowiy and is currently in discovery, during which both parties present facts and expert testimony.
NORTH CAROLINA
B-21 Wines v Guy (Federal District Court, Western District of North Carolina)
North Carolina allows in-state retailers to ship wine to consumers in North Carolina, but denies out-of-state retailers the right to ship to NC consumers, violating the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. STATUS: The state's motion to dismiss the case was denied and the case is currently pending cross motions for summary judgment.
OHIO
Block v Canepa (Federal District Court, Southern District)
After the state of Ohio sued four out-of-state retailers asking the court to deliver an injunction forcing the retailers to stop shipping, the state of Ohio was sued on the claim that its laws violate the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Ohio bars out-of-state retailers from shipping into the state, while allowing their own retailer to ship to Ohioans. STATUS: The two lawsuits, filed by the state and filed by the retailer, were consolidated. The Court is awaiting a response from the state.
RHODE ISLAND
Anvar v Tanner (Federal District Court of Rhode Island)
Rhode Island allows in-state retailers ship to Rhode Island consumers but prohibit out-of-state retailers from shipping into the state. STATUS: The case is in its early stages and is currently in discovery.