Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “California Wine Transport, Inc.”
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE Troy L. Nunley, United States District Judge This matter is before the Court pursuant to Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Transfer Venue. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff Celtic International, LLC (“Plaintiff’) filed an opposition to Defendant’s motion, (ECF No. 17.) Defendant filed a reply to Plaintiffs opposition. (ECF No. 18.) Having
OPINION By the Court, Saitta, C.J.: In this appeal, we address two primary issues. We first consider whether the district court abused its discretion in permanently enjoining appellants from importing and selling certain Bordeaux wines in Nevada. We conclude that it did not. Next, we address whether the district court abused its discretion in permanently enjoining appellants from importing
Evenskaas v. California Transit, Inc.public domain
Filed 7/15/22 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN DAVID EVENSKAAS, B308354 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County v. Super. Ct. No. 20STCV19436) CALIFORNIA TRANSIT, INC., et al., Defendants and Appellants. APPEAL from an order of
Chicago Wine Company v. Mike Braunpublic domain
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-2068 CHICAGO WINE CO., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MIKE BRAUN, Governor of Indiana; THEODORE ROKITA, Attor- ney General of Indiana; and JESSICA ALLEN, Chairwoman of the Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission, Defendan
Sarasota Wine Mkt., LLC v. Parsonpublic domain
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 37] under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs oppose the Motion. The Motion has been fully briefed. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' Motion is GRANTED.
Connecticut Fine Wine and Spirits LLC v. Seagullpublic domain
PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, District Judge: *162 Connecticut Fine Wine and Spirits, d/b/a Total Wine & More ("Total Wine") appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Janet C. Hall, District Judge) dismissing its complaint against the Connecticu
Conn Fine Wine & Spirits, LLC v. Seagullpublic domain
PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, District Judge: *24Connecticut Fine Wine and Spirits, d/b/a Total Wine & More ("Total Wine") appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Janet C. Hall, District Judge) dismissing its complaint against the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection ("DCP") and the Directo
Sarasota Wine Market, LLC v. Eric Schmittpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-1948 ___________________________ Sarasota Wine Market, LLC, et al. lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants v. Eric S. Schmitt, Attorney General of Missouri, et al.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2018-SA-01259-SCT LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, EX REL., THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI AND COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE HERB FRIERSON AND MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. WINE EXPRESS INC., BOTTLE DEALS INC. AND GOLD MEDAL WINE CLUB DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/04/2018 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. JOHN S. GRANT, III TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS:
Connecticut Fine Wine & Spirits, LLC v. Harrispublic domain
RULING RE: MOTIONS TO DISMISS Janet C. Hall, United States District Judge' TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION...359 II. BACKGROUND...360 A. Connecticut’s Liquor Marketplace. . .360 B. Total Wine... 362 III. LEGAL STANDARDS... 363 A. Motions to Dismiss: Rule 12(b)(6).. .363
Wiseman Park, LLC v. S. Glazer's Wine & Spirits, LLCpublic domain
GOODMAN, J.* *113Wiseman Park, LLC (appellant) appeals from the judgment entered following the trial court sustaining the demurrer of Southern Glazer's Wine and Spirits, LLC (respondent)1 to appellant's complaint without leave to amend. Appellant, the holder of a license to sell alcoholi
Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Assn. v. Thomaspublic domain
Justice ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court. *2456 The State of Tennessee imposes demanding durational-residency requirements on all individuals and businesses seeking to obtain or renew a license to operate a liquor store. One provision precludes the renewal of a license unless th
Wiseman Park v. Southern Glazer's Wine and Spiritspublic domain
Filed 10/12/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO WISEMAN PARK, LLC, B266118 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC548599) v. SOUTHERN GLAZER'S WINE AND SPIRITS, LLC, Defendant and Respondent
Best Cellars, Inc. v. Wine Made Simple, Inc.public domain
320 F.Supp.2d 60 (2003) BEST CELLARS, INC., Plaintiff, v. WINE MADE SIMPLE, INC., LJG Wines, Inc., Brigitte Baker, William Baker, and Lisa Grossman, Defendants. No. 01 Civ. 11780(GEL). United States District Court, S.D. New York. March 14, 2003. *61 *62 *63
COLLOTON, Circuit Judge. Southern Wine & Spirits of Missouri, Inc. (“Southern Missouri”) applied for a license to sell liquor at wholesale in Missouri. The Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control' of the Missouri Department of Public Safety (“the Division”) denied the application, because Southern Missouri does not satisfy a residency requirement that applies to liquor whole
Connecticut Fine Wine and Spirits LLC v. Seagullpublic domain
17-2003 Connecticut Fine Wine and Spirits LLC v. Seagull 1 2 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 3 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 4 5 6 August Term, 2017 7 8 (Argued: February 1, 2018 Decided: February 20, 2019 9 Amended: July 29, 2019) 10 11 Docket No. 17-2003-cv 12 13 14 CONNECTICUT FINE WINE AND SPIRITS, LLC, d/b/a, TOTAL WINE
Byrd v. Tennessee Wine & Spirits Retailers Ass'npublic domain
MEMORANDUM Judge Sharp Pending before the Court is Plaintiff1 Tennessee Fine Wines and Spirits, LLC’s (d/b/a Total Wine Spirits Beer & More) (“Tennessee Fine Wines”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, (Docket No. 55), to which Plaintiff Clayton Byrd (“Byrd”) and Defendant Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association (“Association”) have filed Responses in Opposition,
Clayton Byrd v. Tenn. Wine & Spirits Retailers Ass'npublic domain
SUTTON, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part. Tennessee requires sellers of alcohol to have a retail license. To obtain a license, the applicant, including any officers and directors, must be "a bona fide resident of th[e] state during the two-year period immediately preceding" the application.
Wine & Canvas Development, LLC v. Weisserpublic domain
ENTRY ON PENDING MOTIONS TANYA WALTON PRATT, District Judge. Plaintiff Wine & Canvas Development, LLC (‘Wine & Canvas”), is an Indiana limited liability company. As its name suggests, Wine & Canvas organizes parties where guests can take a painting class while enjoying cocktails. Wine & Canvas has named the following as defendants in its complaint: (1) YN Canvas CA, LLC
Wine Country Gift Baskets.Com v. Steenpublic domain
LESLIE H. SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judge: Appellants’ Petition for En Banc Review is DENIED. We withdraw the prior panel opinion, issued on January 26, 2010, and substitute the following. This case primarily concerns a Texas law that allows alcohol retailers to ship to the door of their local consumers. Out-of-Texas wine retailers claim that the dormant Commerce Clause requires they be given a supposedly recipr