CLAYTON BYRD, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission; TENNESSEE FINE WINES AND SPIRITS, LLC, dba Total Wine Spirits Beer & More; AFFLUERE INVESTMENTS, INC., dba Kimbrough Fine Wine & Spirits v. TENNES - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Landry Butler on Feb 21, 2018

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1:

ARGUED: Richard L. Colbert, KAY GRIFFIN, PLLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. William J. Murphy, ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee Tennessee Fine Wines and Spirits. Keith C. Dennen, FARRIS BOBANGO, PLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee Affluere Investments.

Attorneys 2:

ON BRIEF: Richard L. Colbert, John J. Griffin, Jr., Nina M. Eiler, KAY GRIFFIN, PLLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. William J. Murphy, ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, Edward M. Yarbrough, W. Justin Adams, BONE MCALLESTER NORTON PLLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee Tennessee Fine Wines and Spirits. Keith C. Dennen, FARRIS BOBANGO, PLC, Nashville, Tennessee, forAppellee Affluere Investments. Sarah K. Campbell, OFFICE OF THE TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee Clayton Byrd.

MOORE, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which DAUGHTREY, J., joined, and SUTTON, J., joined in part. SUTTON, J. (pp. 24–34), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Judge(s): DAUGHTREY, MOORE, and SUTTON, Circuit Judges.

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville.

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Defendant-Appellant Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association (“Association”) appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment regarding § 57-3-204(b) of Tennessee Code Annotated. Under § 57-3-204(b), to receive a retailer-alcoholic-beverages license, a person, corporation, or firm needs to be a Tennessee resident for at least two years, and to renew a license, there is a ten-year requirement. After examination, the district court determined that these durational-residency requirements violate the dormant Commerce Clause.

For the reasons discussed below, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment declaring § 57-3-204(b)(2)(A), (3)(A)–(B), and (3)(D) in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause and SEVER those provisions from the Tennessee statute.