By Barry Eberling | Napa Valley Register | Feb 16, 2024 |
A trial that has Napa County suing Hoopes Family Vineyard winery will see the next big steps take place largely behind-the-scenes.
Both sides questioned witnesses in front of Napa County Superior Court Judge Mark Boessenecker over 11 days. On Wednesday, they finished.
The two sides will file written closing arguments. Then Boessenecker will rule on the county’s case against Hoopes. All of this could take several months. Then a second phase of the trial involving a Hoopes countersuit against the county could begin, this one before a jury.
At this point, the only scheduled hearing is for Feb. 21. The Hoopes’ side wants the court to strike portions of the county’s allegations.
A major part of the case is Napa County’s claim that Hoopes winery holds illegal wine tastings. County attorneys said the winery was established by a previous owner in 1984 under a small winery exemption, which forbids public tours, wine tastings and social events of a public nature.
To hold tastings and events, Hoopes must seek a use permit, said attorney Arthur Hartinger on behalf of the county. The county then looks at such issues as traffic and water and wastewater systems.
County attorneys suggested during the trial that Hoopes winery doesn’t want to seek a use permit because it doesn’t want to face the potential expenses.
“You have to go apply and get a use permit, just like anyone else,” Hartinger said during the trial.
The Hoopes side said the winery doesn’t host tastings, but rather engages in legal retail sales of wine that the customers can drink onsite. Those visiting have a two-bottle minimum purchase.
“We don’t do tastings in the conventional sense,” said Lindsay Hoopes of the winery while in the witness stand.
Also, Hoopes attorneys didn’t concede that all types of tastings are banned by the small winery exemption. They drew a distinction between public tastings by drop-in visitors and private, by-appointment-only tastings.
The witness who spent the most time in the stand — several hours over several days — was Lindsay Hoopes. She was called both by the plaintiffs and the defense.
As part of the trial, Napa County alleged that Lindsay Hoopes and the business entity that operates Hoopes winery are “alter egos.” If Boessenecker agrees and Hoopes loses the case, Lindsay Hoopes could have to pay damages.
County attorneys in making their alter ego case asserted that the winery owes Lindsay Hoopes $5.2 million for money she provided to it, but is under no legal obligation to repay.
Napa County also alleged Hoopes winery illegally sells items from a store and has various other code violations, such as chicken coops without a flood plain permit.
A Hoopes filing said at issue is whether Napa County can render a lawful business valueless through arbitrary, vague and unintelligible rules, leaving no room for compliance.
The Hoopes side on Feb. 21 will ask Boessenecker to strike portions of the county’s case against the winery.
For example, the county alleged Hoopes winery makes its wine offsite. If so, that makes the Yountville-area operation a wine shop/liquor store, a use that is illegal in the county’s agricultural preserve, according to a county filing.
The Hoopes side said the county didn’t bring forward a witness during the trial to back that claim. The county side points to a deposition with the Hoopes’ winemaker.