Cana alleged that PortoVino improperly terminated its wine distribution agreement. The motion to dismiss put payment terms, credit, and the distributor’s compensation claim in view.
The Crown Imports appeal put a practical question before the Ninth Circuit in 2023. Can a supplier move beer brands under Washington franchise law by paying compensation?
What does “Margarita Hard Seltzer” tell a shopper? The Warren ruling looks at the words, images, and disclosures on Topo Chico’s packaging together.
Both bourbon brands claimed a Kentucky first. Their dispute raised a question for every producer that relies on TTB label approval when defending an advertising claim.
Where does a sale occur under your beer distribution agreement? The second Amtec dismissal ruling shows how the place of sale and transfer of title can matter.
When a winery changes hands, what happens to the wholesaler’s rights? An Ohio dispute examines how negotiations can affect the statutory transfer timetable.
The B-21 Wines petition asked the Supreme Court to review North Carolina’s rules for shipments from out-of-state wine retailers. The filing followed Judge Wilkinson’s dissent.
Olympia Beer’s slogan and waterfall imagery prompted claims about the water used to brew it. The class certification order examines how later changes affected the proposed class.
CANarchy’s right to sell beer to go turned on whether its leased breweries counted as owned premises under Texas law. The Fifth Circuit addressed that distinction in 2022.
A change in who controls a brewer raised a separate question about who held the license. Pabst v. Winner examines how that distinction affects Maryland distributor rights.
The 2019 corn syrup ads sparked years of litigation between the brewers. The 2022 dismissal order closes the dispute over the campaign’s claims about rival beers.
Ralph Steadman’s Freezin’ Season artwork prompted another Flying Dog label dispute. Read about North Carolina’s rejection and the court’s commercial speech analysis.
