This is the home page for documents relating to the North Carolina wine case, Beskind v. Easley, concerning the constitutionality of laws prohibiting the direct shipment of wine to consumers.

Questions -- contact James A. Tanford at tanford@indiana.edu

Last updated 02/04/04.

BESKIND v EASLEY.

The District Court declared NC's direct shipment law unconstitutional in Beskind v. Easley, 197 F. Supp. 2d 464 (WD NC 2002). You can read the district court's opinion by clicking here . That decision was affirmed in part and reversed in part by the Fourth Circuit on April 8. The 4th Circuit affirmed the basic finding that the direct shipment law violated the Commerce Clause because it discriminated against interstate commerce, but then decided to strike the farm winery act rather than the direct shipment laws, leaving everyone equally frustrated rather than equally happy. You can read the 4th circuit opinion by clicking here .

We have filed a petition for rehearing. Click here .

Here are the Briefs and other documents relevant to the appeal:

a. Appellants' Brief filed by the State of North Carolina
b. Our Appellees' Brief filed in response
c. Appellants' Reply Brief by State
d. Primary amicus brief filed by Nat'l Wine Wholesalers Assoc. in support of the State
e. Amicus brief from Nat'l Conf of State Liquor Administrators in support of the State
f. Amicus brief filed by State of Michigan in support of the State.
g. First part of Joint Appendix including some plaintiffs' affidavits (quality not very good)
h. Oakstone affidavit , from Plaintiff Oakstone Winery, Apx. pp. 58-60.
i. Siegl affidavit (Am. Vinter's Assoc, part of Plaintiffs' evidence), Apx. pp. 62-65
j. Bridenbaugh affidavit (Appendix pp. 66-76, Plaintiffs' key expert witness)

NEW YORK.