http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9570960" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Snarf.
This is really good news. Keeping my fingers crossed for a positive result in the Fifth Circuit for Texas retail shipping.
I am shocked by all of the friend of the court briefs on the plaintiff side. It’s like a game of pile-on.
Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office had appealed the earlier ruling by a federal district court judge on behalf of the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission.
In an earlier brief submitted to the appeals court, a state attorney argued that the production caps “represent a rational and well-reasoned solution to the acknowledged difficulties experienced by small wineries.”
Wait a sec. Isn’t Martha Coakley running for Senate against Scott Brown for the vacant seat once held by Ted Kennedy? Coakley argued the Massachusetts laws were fair? Not trying to get overly political, but I won’t be voting for her on Tuesday!!! I want wine choices!!!
Alex,
As AG, it is her duty to represent the state against the appeal. She is not taking sides, per se.
Does an AG have to support a law that they believe is unconstitutional? It seems to me that an AG should acknowledge the flaws in a bad law and not litigate over those issues.
Secondarily, the state really has no interest in defending this law. The real interest lies solely with the distributors.
The Mass. ABC is in bed with the distributors and want to preserve the 3 tier system and maintain control. The AG’s appeal was on behalf of the Mass. ABC ergo the distributors. Since Daval just taxed (a double tax) liquor and wine at 6.25% this is good news for adding to state revenue, just the ABC and their masters have to deal with less contol and more competition.
Yes, Mdme Coakley did in fact HAVE TO appeal - she was representing the interests of a state agency. The only other option was for her to quit. I don’t think wine shipping was something she was willing to quit over.
She used to be the middlesex county DA, when this appeal was started i wrote her a letter with my concerns and she wrote back to me explaining the situation
I get it ! So this is how the uncertain fate of our great land’s health care reform might become inextricably entwined with Coakley’s anti-wine ball-n-chain. Whooda thunk ?
please keep this thread about the laws of wine shipping…if it gets too much into Coakley herself, we’ll have to move it to politics (and that sucks)
In a GA restaurant this week and for the first time ever there one can now depart a restaurant with unconsumed wine (as if that ever happens) and receive wine directly from out of state.
we got the wine “to go” rule abut 2yrs or so ago. Makes so much more sense than forcing us to drink it all and then get $hit faced!
Tom
As a board member of the Specialty Wine Retailers Assoc, I am hopeful for the 5th Circuit decision to be positive as well.
If you know retailers that are not members of this important organization that funded the case in Texas, you need to get them to become members now.
We need the support.
Jeff, where did you get this news? Both parts are great news.
Does the out of state shipping relate to wineries, retailers or both?
I wonder if the West Coast could get the 1st Circuit to rule on this issue for us too?
That was what the waiter at the steakhouse in Atlanta told me. And then he bagged up my bottle for me.
Why did she HAVE TO appeal or quit? The AG office has the right to determine what cases are worthy of appeal. If a state agency takes a really bad position on something, or a law is blatantly bad, it seems to me that the AG has a the power to tell the state agency that the case is a loser and she will not spend the state’s resources (tax dollars) on an attempt to overturn a lower courts well reasoned order. But by taking the appeal, she is the one that decided it was worth pursuing.
I think she has to appeal because the law is based on legislation; only the legislators can change it, she can’t protest the law of the land as AG, she has to enforce it…
Bruce, you are a lawyer, correct? Isn’t this pretty standard stuff?
Brett,
Yes I am a lawyer. But I practice in the commercial arena and have little knowledge of the obligations of an attorney general. I still don’t know that they are obligated to appeal a lower court decision.
Let me posit this as a hypothetical. If the law said that wineries owned by whites could ship to MA, but that wineries owned by blacks could not, I am sure that a trial court would strike down that law. According to what you and Zach are saying, Coakley would have to appeal that decision, even though it is obviously correct. I do not think that is true. I think an attorney general has some discretion as to what appeals to take. But I asked this as a question rather than make a statement in my earlier post because I am not knowledgable in this area. So, can someone point to where the AG is obligated to take all appeals whenever a state law is struck down?