-
Wine Jobs
Assistant Manager
Assistant Cider Maker
Viticulture and Enology...
-
Wine Country Real Estates
Winery in Canada For Sale
-
Wine Barrels & Equipment
75 Gallon Stainless Steel...
Wanted surplus/ excess tin...
Winery Liquidation Auction...
-
Grapes & Bulk Wines
2022 Chardonnay
2023 Pinot Noir
2022 Pinot Noir
-
Supplies & Chemicals
Planting supplies
Stagg Jr. Bourbon - Batch 12
-
Wine Services
Wine
Sullivan Rutherford Estate
Clark Ferrea Winery
-
World Marketplace
Canned Beer
Wine from Indonesia
Rare Opportunity - Own your...
- Wine Jobs UK
- DCS Farms LLC
- ENOPROEKT LTD
- Liquor Stars
- Stone Hill Wine Co Inc
Connecticut: Discount wine chain sues state over minimum liquor prices
Aug 23, 2016
(CTPost) - A discount wine and spirits chain with stores in Milford and Norwalk sued the state Tuesday over its minimum liquor pricing law, which the retailer says puts Connecticut at a competitive disadvantage for cost-conscious consumers.
In an eight-page anti-trust lawsuit filed in federal court in Connecticut, Total Wine & More of Bethesda, Md., argued that the retail prices on some products are 24 percent higher in Connecticut than in surrounding states. It cited a survey by the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States.
No other state has a law on the books that inflates liquor prices like Connecticut, said the company, which also embarked Tuesday on a major advertising blitz in the state touting its “new low prices.”
“It’s time for Connecticut to finally enter the 21st century when it comes to the sale of wine and spirits,” said Edward Cooper, the head of public affairs for Total Wine & More. “The loser in the current equation is the consumer.”
The lawsuit names Jonathan Harris, the state’s consumer protection commissioner, and John Suchy, the director of the liquor control division, which is under consumer protection, as defendants. The Department of Consumer Protection declined to comment on the matter Tuesday.
A spokeswoman for state Attorney General George Jepsen, who regularly represents state agencies in litigation, said the office had not yet been served with the lawsuit
Comments: