by Kerana Todorov | Dec 5, 2023 | Wine Business |
Two Napa Valley wineries will not be joining Hoopes Vineyard’s property rights lawsuit against Napa County.
Napa County Superior Court Judge Mark Boessenecker on Nov. 28 ruled that Smith-Madrone and Summit Lake Vineyards and Winery LLC could not intervene and join the ongoing lawsuit.
Hoopes, a winery south of Yountville, and the two other wineries were entitled before 1990. That year, the Napa County Board of Supervisors approved a new set of rules regulating wineries.
In his order issued Nov. 28, Boessenecker said Smith-Madrone and Summit Lake were not entitled to intervene in the Hoopes Vineyard case.
Smith-Madrone’s and Summit Lake’s participation would be “largely cumulative and would unduly complicate an already complicated case,” Boessenecker also wrote.
Napa County and Hoopes Vineyard have been in court since October 2022 over a number of issues, including whether or not the family-owned winery can welcome visitors and host wine tastings at its winery south of Yountville. A jury trial is set for Jan. 29 in Napa.
The legal battle began when Napa County filed a civil complaint against Hoopes Vineyard, alleging public nuisance, unlawful business practices and other allegations. Hoopes Vineyard subsequently filed a cross complaint.
Napa County’s attorneys contend Hoopes Winery, which Lindsay Hoopes purchased in 2017, has a grandfathered use permit exemption which does not allow the winery to have on-site wine consumption as wells as “hospitality and retail activity.”
Hoopes said her winery’s entitlements already allow for wine tastings and visitors. These entitlements came with the property. Hoopes, a former assistant district attorney in San Francisco who is now an adjunct professor at UC Law San Francisco, has argued repeatedly she should not have to apply for an expensive use permit.
Napa County is taking away property rights, Hoopes said in November. “So, they are taking away our livelihood, our ability to feed ourselves, our ability to function as businesses.”
Napa County strongly opposed allowing the two small wineries to join the case.
“This is a standalone case,” Art Hartinger, an attorney representing Napa County, told the court in November, referring to the Hoopes case
The County’s legal representatives argued among other points that allowing Smith-Madrone and Summit Lake to join the lawsuit would complicate the case and increase costs.
“Napa County is pleased with the decision and believes the judge made the right call,” a Napa County representative said in a written statement on Monday.
Stu Smith, founder and general partner at Smith Madrone, said the wineries were evaluating their options.
Hoopes and Summit Lake operate under use permit exemptions. Smith-Madrone has had a use permit since 1973.
Smith said his winery can have an unlimited number of visitors. It is “silent” on events, he said. However, a county database indicates the winery can only have 10 visitors a week and no events.
Hoopes, who has been at times arguing in court on her own behalf, told Boessenecker in November that Smith-Madrone and Summit Lake have the same problem as Hoopes: they are small wineries entitled before 1990, referring to the year Napa County adopted its Winery Definition Ordinance.
Last month, Hoopes, Smith-Madrone and Summit Lake asked the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California Ismail J. Ramsey, and California Attorney General Rob Bonta to investigate Napa County’s “egregious constitutional rights violations” against small wineries.
The U.S. Department of Justice declined to comment on the letter.
“To protect its integrity, we’re unable to comment on, even to confirm or deny, a potential or ongoing investigation,” a representative for the U.S. Department of Justice said in a written statement on Nov. 17.
The case came before Boessenecker in November after three other judges stepped aside at the request of the parties involved this fall.
Napa County opposed Superior Court Judge Cynthia Smith. The county’s legal team did so after Smith disclosed during a court hearing that her husband works for One Hundred Acre, a winery near Calistoga owned by Jason Woodbridge.
Woodbridge filed a lawsuit in October 2022 against Napa County over a hillside vineyard development near Calistoga.
Two other judges then were asked to step aside before the matter came before Boessenecker. The next hearing is Dec. 22.