Ohio Wins Some and Loses Some on Retail Shipping Motion to Dismiss

A busy week of dormant Commerce Clause litigation continues.  Judge Sarah Morrison of the Eastern District of Ohio partially granted the state of Ohio’s Motion to Dismiss but ruled against outright dismissal of the case.

In her decision, Judge Morrison granted the motion to dismiss most of the individually named state defendants but kept the case alive for the underlying charge against the state.  Judge Morrison noted that there needs to be additional information for her to properly rule on the underlying motion to dismiss so she ordered the Plaintiff to submit additional proof related to the likelihood of enforcement actions against the plaintiffs.

(previous post) Motion to Dismiss and Response Filed in Ohio Retailer Shipping Case

The state of Ohio has filed its Motion to Dismiss the retailer shipping case brought by an Illinois retailer seeking the right to ship to Ohio consumers.  It notes several defects in the complaint centered around standing and redressability.

The Defendant’s response to the state’s motion predictably disagrees with the state’s view citing the rich history of litigation within states in the 6th Circuit and urges the court to allow them to move the evidentiary stages.

(previous post) Ohio Wholesaler Group Intervenes in Ohio Retailer Litigation

The Wholesale Beer & Wine Association of Ohio has been permitted to  intervene in the pending dormant commerce clause challenge filed by an Illinois retailer alleging that Ohio retail delivery laws violate the dormant Commerce Clause.

(previous post) Ohio Joins the Litigation Club As There Is a New Retailer Lawsuit Filed in Ohio

Earlier this month Ohio was covered on this website for going on the offense to prevent untaxed alcohol sales into the state.   This week, they are now a defendant as an Illinois retailer has brought a dormant Commerce Clause challenge against them.

The Complaint filed on behalf of House of Glunz retail store in Illinois alleges that Ohio law violates the dormant Commerce Clause because it allows Ohio retailers to do take orders of wine and deliveries in Ohio but claims a retailer in Illinois cannot.

This lawsuit filed in the Southern District of Ohio is brought by the same law firm that has at least eight other dormant Commerce Clause challenges against various states including one that has sought review at the United States Supreme Court.

Leave a Reply