Breweries | Read Time: 3 minutes

Out-of-State Suppliers: Check Requirements of 3 Destination State Agencies

Before selling alcoholic beverages in another state–whether directly to consumers (where permitted) or through an in-state distributor–a supplier must know what preliminary compliance is required in that state. In most cases, an out-of-state supplier is required to obtain permission from one or more government agencies of the destination state. While each state’s requirements are different, an out-of-state supplier is required to register with or receive a permit or license from the destination state’s (1) alcoholic control agency, (2) business companies agency, and/or (3) revenue agency. 1. Licensing by the Destination State’s Alcohol Control Agency Most states require out-of-state alcoholic beverage suppliers (sometimes called out-of-state shippers) to be licensed by the destination state’s alcohol control agency. This is true whether the supplier is permitted to send alcoholic beverage products directly to consumers in the destination state–as is often the case for wineries–or the supplier is contracting to sell and cause delivery to licensed distributor or wholesaler in the destination state. Out-of-state brokers and importers, who may not ever take possession of alcoholic beverage products, must often be licensed as out-of-state suppliers before arranging deliveries to an in-state distributor. A prime example of the licensure required for out-of-state suppliers exists in Georgia. Before a brewery, winery, or distillery, or an alcoholic beverage broker cause products to be delivered to a Georgia wholesaler, it must obtain an Out-of-State Supplier license issued by the Georgia Alcohol & Tobacco Division. Georgia’s Out-of-State Supplier licensing process requires submitting personnel statements, citizenship affidavits, and a tax liability bond. Georgia, like many other states, also requires the out-of-state supplier to identify the in-state licensed wholesaler it has appointed and identify the brands that will be sold in the state. And, of course, the Georgia Alcohol & Tobacco Division charges a licensure fee. 2. Qualification to Do Business by the Destination State’s Business Companies Agency Prior to being licensed as an out-of-state supplier in many states, the supplier is required to be qualified to do business in the destination in state. Qualifying or registering to do business in a state does not apply solely in the context of alcoholic beverage, it is a general requirement for any foreign business company that will be doing more than a little business in a state. Qualifying to do business in a state generally requires registration with the state’s business companies agency, which is often part of the Secretary of State’s office. For example, out-of-state suppliers who want to make sales in Wyoming must first register through the Wyoming Secretary of State (see reference in this Wyoming Liquor Division Licensing Guide). The registration process involves providing basic information about the company, designating an in-state Registered Agent, and paying an annual registration fee. The requirement of an in-state Registered Agent can provide a challenge for out-of-state companies. Several companies provide Registered Agent services for every state, for an annual fee. An internet search for “registered agent services” provides a number of options. 3. Register with the Destination State’s Revenue Agency Even in situations where an out-of-state supplier is not required to be licensed by the destination state’s alcoholic beverage agency, it might be required to register with the state’s revenue agency. This is most often the case where the state separates alcoholic beverage regulation and alcoholic beverage excise tax collection between two agencies: an alcoholic beverage agency and state revenue agency.  For example, in New York, out-of-state suppliers are treated as “distributors” for alcoholic beverage excise taxes. They are required to register with the New York Department and Finance. Do you have any questions about selling alcoholic beverages outside your home state? Contact us at contact@brewerlong.com to schedule a consultation with a beverage attorney. Because we’re attorneys: Disclaimer.

Continue Reading
Distribution | Read Time: 3 minutes

Alcohol Distributors’ Discounts Under Florida Law

Florida’s “Tied House Evil” Law—Florida Statutes Section 561.42—generally prohibits alcoholic beverage distributors from having any financial interest, directly or indirectly, in the business of an alcoholic beverage vendor. It also prohibits distributors from assisting any vendor by gifts or loans of money or property “or by giving of any rebates of any kind whatsoever.” However, an exception is made in the Florida Beverage Laws so that distributors are allows to give price discounts to the vendors to which they sell. As is so often the case, though, Florida’s rules around distributors’ discounts are different for wine and spirits, on the one hand, and beer on the other. For Wine and Liquor, Broad Freedom on Trade Discounts When it comes to the distribution of wine and spirits, distributors have greater freedom to provide discounts to vendors. Subsection 6 of the Tied House Evil Law (Florida Statutes Section 561.42(6)) provides: “Nothing herein shall be taken to forbid the giving of trade discounts in the usual course of business upon wine and liquor sales.” “Trade discounts” are defined by Black’s Law Dictionary as “a discount from list price offered to all customers of a given type; e.g. discount offered by lumber dealer to building contractor.” Accordingly, distributors may offer vendors trade discounts for any purpose or with any criteria, provided they are offered on the usual course of business. In addition, distributors are not required to publicly disclose the trade discounts they offer on wine and liquor, unlike discounts on beer. For Beer, Trade Discounts are Limited and Public The story is different for distributors’ sales discounts on beer. Chapter 563 of the Florida Statutes, which specifically addresses beer and malt beverages, limits discounts–also referred to as price differentials–to certain criteria. Florida Statutes Section 563.065 provides that distributors may offer discounts on the sale of beer to vendors only on the basis of one or more of the following four criteria: The vendor’s county. The location of the distributor’s warehouse supplying the vendor. Whether the vendor sells beer for on premises consumption or off premises consumption. The quantity of beer sold to the vendor. In addition, all discounts on beer must be reported in advance to the Florida Division of Alcohol and Tobacco (ABT). These reports of discounts are publicly available on the ABT’s Beer Price Notices web page. Do you have questions about alcoholic beverage distributors’ price discounts in Florida? Contact us at contact@brewerlong.com to schedule a consultation. Because we’re attorneys: This blog post is provided on an “as is” and “as available” basis as of the date of publication. We disclaim any duty to update or correct any information contained in this blog post, including errors, even if we are notified about them. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we disclaim all representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied with respect to the information contained in this blog post, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title, non-infringement, accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. We will not be liable for damages of any kind arising from or in connection with your use of or reliance on this blog post, including, but not limited to, direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, and punitive damages. You agree to use this blog post at your own risk. Regarding your particular circumstances, we recommend that you consult your own legal counsel–hopefully BrewerLong.

Continue Reading
Brands | Read Time: 3 minutes

Tips for Effective Management for Beer Brand Distribution in Florida

In Florida, it’s common for beer suppliers and distributors alike to speak in terms of the appointment of a supplier’s exclusive distributor. This is not technically accurate in the context of the Florida Beverage Laws. A beer supplier is not required to appoint an exclusive distributor for itself in Florida. Rather, a supplier is required by Florida law to appoint exclusive distributors for each beer brand it chooses to distribute in Florida. The focus (and the franchise) is on the brands, not the brewery. With that brands-focus in mind, here are 3 tips for beer suppliers’ to better manage their appointment of exclusive distributors for beer brands. Tip #1: Avoid “All Brands and Extensions” Distribution Agreements It is common in Florida for beer distribution agreements to apply to “all brands and extensions” of the supplier. So common, in fact, the a large Florida distributor recently made the following statements in a federal court pleading: “Beer distribution agreements in Florida are not amended for every new brand because they are covered by Florida Beer Franchise Law, which makes it so that once a case of a brand is sold the distributor has the distribution rights for all brands.” This statement, and the practice of distribution agreements covering “all brands and extensions”, is not consistent with the Florida Beverage Laws concerning brand distribution. Florida Statutes Section 563.021(1) provides: “Where a manufacturer or importer sells several brands, the agreement may apply to all brands sold by the manufacturer or importer or may apply to one brand or several brands so long as each brand is covered by an exclusive territorial agreement.” (emphasis added) Beer suppliers should exercise extreme caution before agreeing to distribution agreements that cover “all brands and extensions” of the supplier. Making this agreement robs the supplier’s future self of the freedom to make strategic decisions about the distribution of its future brands and brand extensions. Tip #2: Select the Right Distributors in the Right Territories for the Right Brands Provided that all brands distributed in the State of Florida are covered by an exclusive territorial agreement, beer suppliers can pick the right distributors for the right brands. Suppliers can have two or more distributors within the same distribution territory, as long as each of those distributors has the franchise to distributor different brands. Likewise, suppliers can appoint different distributors to distribution the same brands in different territories. Granting the right to exclusively distribute all beer brands to one distributor in a territory is probably the right decision in many cases (particularly considering economies of scale), but it is not a requirement of the Florida Beverage Laws. Beer suppliers have greater flexibility in deciding the right distributor to distribute each of its brands. Tip #3: Craft Distribution Goals and Terms that Fit the Brand Even for territories in which a beer supplier has designated one exclusive distributor for all of its brands, different terms, requirements, expectations and goals might apply to some of those brands. For instance, consider a brewery’s flagship brands versus its seasonal brands. It is not inconsistent with the Florida Beverage Laws that a beer supplier and distributor agree on terms that recognize that not all brands–even from the same supplier–should be treated the same. The one exception comes to the terms that apply to specific beer brands concerns pricing. The Florida Beverage Laws prohibits the distribution agreement from setting the distributor’s prices for sales to retailers. See Fla. Stat. s. 563.021(3). This includes not only explicitly set prices but also formulas, markup factors, or other methods of fixing prices. Distributors are guarantee the right to determine their own prices to retailers. Do you have questions about crafting the perfect Florida distribution agreements for your beer brands? We’d love to discuss it with you. Contact us at contact@brewerlong.com to schedule a consultation. Because we’re attorneys: This blog post is provided on an “as is” and “as available” basis as of the date of publication. We disclaim any duty to update or correct any information contained in this blog post, including errors, even if we are notified about them. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we disclaim all representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied with respect to the information contained in this blog post, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title, non-infringement, accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. We will not be liable for damages of any kind arising from or in connection with your use of or reliance on this blog post, including, but not limited to, direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, and punitive damages. You agree to use this blog post at your own risk. Regarding your particular circumstances, we recommend that you consult your own legal counsel–hopefully BrewerLong.

Continue Reading
ABT | Read Time: 3 minutes

Florida’s “No Sale” List and How to Get Off It

Late Payment to Distributors Can Land a Vendor on the “No Sale” List Florida alcoholic beverage vendors can end up on the Delinquent Account List–also called the “No Sale” List–if they fail to timely pay a distributor’s invoice. When a vendor purchases alcoholic beverages from a distributor, the vendor’s payment must be delivered no later than the 10th day after the calendar week in which the sale was made, according to Florida’s “Tied House Evil” Statute (Florida Statutes Section 561.42(3)-(5)). When payment is late, the distributor can start the process to include the vendor on the No Sale List. While a vendor is on the No Sale List, the vendor is prohibited from purchasing alcohol and all distributors are prohibited from selling alcohol to the vendor. This prohibition continues for as long as the vendor is on the No Sale List. How a Vendor Gets on the No Sale List Distributors are required to notify the Florida Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco (ABT) when a vendor fails to pay an invoice by the 10th day after the calendar week in which the sale was made. After receiving notice from the distributor, the ABT is required to provide written notice to the vendor about the distributor’s report. The vendor, within 5 days after receipt of the ABT’s notice, may take one of three steps: Pay the distributor’s invoice and provide proof of payment to the ABT; Provide to the ABT “good cause” for why the vendor should not be included on the No Sale List; or Demand a hearing. If the vendor fails to take one of these three steps, or if the ABT determines that the vendor does not have good cause to avoid payment of the invoice, then the ABT will place the vendor on the No Sale List. How a Vendor Gets Off the No Sale List While a vendor is included on the No Sale List, the vendor is prohibited from purchasing alcoholic beverages and all distributors are prohibited from selling alcoholic beverages to the vendor. To remove the vendor from the No Sale List, one of the following steps is required: The vendor provides the ABT proof that it has paid the distributor’s invoice; The distributor files with the ABT a Delinquent Account Release Form; or The vendor provides good cause to the ABT for why the vendor should be removed from the No Sale List. “Good cause” for preventing the vendor from going on the No Sale List, if provided within 5 days of the ABT’s notice, or getting the vendor removed from the No Sale List, may include payment, failure of consideration provided by the distributor (for example, the distributor failed to deliver the invoiced products) or any other defense which would be considered sufficient in a common law action. Whether or not good cause exists is determined by the Director of the ABT and is reviewable by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulations. Do you have questions about Florida’s No Sale List or how to get off it? Contact us at contact@brewerlong.com to schedule a 15-minute introductory call at no charge. Because we’re attorneys: This blog post is provided on an “as is” and “as available” basis as of the date of publication. We disclaim any duty to update or correct any information contained in this blog post, including errors, even if we are notified about them. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we disclaim all representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied with respect to the information contained in this blog post, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title, non-infringement, accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. We will not be liable for damages of any kind arising from or in connection with your use of or reliance on this blog post, including, but not limited to, direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, and punitive damages. You agree to use this blog post at your own risk. Regarding your particular circumstances, we recommend that you consult your own legal counsel–hopefully BrewerLong.

Continue Reading
Distribution | Read Time: 5 minutes

Florida’s Beer Franchise Law: a Litigation Case Study

Florida’s Beer Franchise Law Florida Beverage Law requires beer manufacturers and importers to work with beer distributors. At the heart of the relationship between suppliers and distributors is Florida’s Beer Franchise Law, Florida Statutes Section 563.022. The Franchise Law is a long, complicated statute that requires each beer supplier to grant a Florida distributor the exclusive right (called a “franchise”) to distribute the supplier’s beer in the all or part of the state. In disputes between a supplier and its distributor, the Franchise Law describes the rights of both parties. For instance, the Franchise Law controls whether a supplier can terminate the distributor’s exclusive franchise. There are very few written case opinions addressing a supplier’s attempt to terminate a Florida distributor’s franchise. The U.S. District Court’s 2014 opinion in the case of Micro Man Distributors, Inc. vs. Louis Glunz Beer, Inc. is a valuable look at what contributed to a beer supplier’s decision to terminate a distributor’s franchise, how the beer supplier handled the termination, and whether termination was permitted under the Franchise Law. What Led to Termination In April 2012, Glunz Beer acquired the exclusive contract to import beer manufactured by Stiegl Brewer in Austria. The prior importer had given Micro Man the exclusive franchise to distribute Stiegl beer in all of Florida, and Glunz Beer continued to use Micro Man as its distributor in Florida. Glunz Beer and Micro Man did not have a written contract. Soon after acquiring the Stiegl contract, Glunz Beer learned that Micro Man did not have the ability to distribute beer in the Florida Panhandle or the Florida Keys. Micro Man refused Glunz Beer’s request to prioritize distribution in the Florida Keys. Glunz Beer also asked Micro Man to distribute Stiegl beer to Publix, Florida’s largest grocery store chain, which Micro Man refused. Glunz Beer offered to buy back Micro Man’s franchise for part or all of Florida, which Micro Man also refused. Glunz Beer Provides Notice of Termination In December 2012, Glunz Beer initiated the termination of Micro Man’s franchise following the procedure laid out in Florida’s Beer Franchise Law. Glunz Beer sent to Micro Man, via certified mail, a Notice of Deficiencies which specifically three failures: (1) Micro Man’s failure to provide sales coverage through Florida, (2) Micro Man’s failure to sell Stiegl beer to Publix, and (3) Micro Man’s failure to pay Glunz Beer’s invoices timely. The Notice of Deficiencies gave Micro Man 30 days to provide a written plan of actions it proposed to correct the failures. Finally, the Notice of Deficiencies informed Micro Man that it would have 90 days to cure the three identified deficiencies or else its exclusive distribution franchise for Florida would be terminated. Micro Man did not submit a corrective plan of action. Micro Man did begin serving the World of Beer chain in the Florida Keys in February 2013, but it did not take other steps to service the Florida Panhandle or distribute to Publix. Glunz Beer sent Micro Man a termination letter in February 2013. Glunz Beer’s termination letter stated that termination was because Micro Man had failed to establish a sales presence throughout Florida and had failed to provide a corrective plan of action. The letter provided a termination date at the end of May 2013. What the Court Concluded Micro Man filed a lawsuit against Glunz Beer and asked the court to declare that Glunz Beer did not have “good cause” for terminating the franchise, which is required under the Franchise Law. Glunz Beer countered that it’s termination did comply with the Franchise Law and asked the court to declare that Glunz Beer was entitled to appoint a new distributor. Both sides filed motions for summary judgment. A court may grant summary judgment in a party’s favor only if there is no genuine dispute as to any material facts. A fact is material if it may affect the outcome of the case. This means that summary judgment is only appropriate where the law is so clearly on one side or the other that the specific facts do not matter. Unsurprisingly, the court refused to grant summary judgment for either party because the particular facts matter quite a lot. As the court noted, Florida’s Beer Franchise Law requires that “good cause” for purposes of terminating an exclusive distribution franchise, requires five elements: The distributor failed to comply with a term of its agreement with the supplier that is reasonable and materially significant; The supplier first acquired knowledge of the failure not more than 18 months before it officially notified the distributor; The distributor was given written notice by the supplier in the manner required by the Franchise Law; The distributor was given a reasonable opportunity to provide good faith efforts to comply with the contract provision; and The distributor was given 30 days to submit a plan of corrective action and an additional 90 days to correct the failure or sell the franchise. According to the court, the crucial issue was whether Micro Man had devoted “reasonable efforts and resources” to its distribution of Stiegl beer. Even though a written contract between Glunz Beer and Micro Man did not exist, the court concluded that the “reasonable efforts and resources” standard, which is a specific requirement under the Franchise Law, must be a term of the unwritten agreement between supplier and distributor. Whether or not Micro Man devoted reasonable efforts and resources depended on the particular facts in the case, which meant that the court could not grant Micro Man’s motion for summary judgment. The reasonableness of Micro Man’s efforts was also central to the first element to show that Glunz Beer had “good cause” to terminate the franchise. Therefore, the court also could not grant Glunz Beer’s motion for summary judgment. The Takeaways There are four primary takeaways from the court’s reported opinion in the case of Micro Man Distributors, Inc. vs. Louis Glunz Beer, Inc.: First, a distributor has an obligation to devote commercially reasonable efforts and resources to the […]

Continue Reading
Distribution | Read Time: 3 minutes

Florida Farm Wineries: Operating in All Three Tiers

Florida’s Three Tier System is a source of constant frustration for most of Florida’s alcoholic beverage and manufacturers. Brewers, distilleries, and (most) wineries are prohibited from distributing their own products to retail vendors. Florida breweries and distilleries are prohibited from selling their products to online customers. Florida distilleries can have gift shops, but they are prohibited from selling beverages to customers for consumption on premises. Unlike other alcoholic beverage industry members, Florida Farm Wineries are allowed to operate in all three tiers. Florida Farm Wineries Can Do It All Florida Farm Wineries are uniquely allowed to hold a Florida manufacturing license and a distribution license. Florida Statutes Section 561.24 generally prohibits distilleries and wineries from being licensed as a distributor in Florida. However, the statute specifically provides: “This section does not apply to any winery qualifying as a certified Florida Farm Winery under s. 599.004.” Florida Farm Wineries, like all wineries in Florida, are authorized to have up to three retail license for tasting rooms that are contiguous to the manufacturing premises. Tasting rooms can make sales of alcoholic beverages (beer, wine, and distilled spirits) for consumption on premises and/or carryout, depending on the vendor license. Whether or not it has a licensed tasting room, a Florida Farm Winery may be issued a permit allowing it to conduct tasting and sales of its wine at Florida fairs, trade shows, expositions, and festivals. Florida Farm Wineries, like all wineries in Florida, may also make online sales and ship their products to retail customers in Washington D.C. and 47 other states. See How to Build a Direct-to-Consumer Florida Beverage Company. Requirements to be a Florida Farm Winery To qualify under the Florida Farm Winery Program, a winery must meet certain requirements: Produce or sell less than 250,000 gallons of wine annually, 60% or more of which is made from state agricultural products; Maintain at least 5 acres of owned or managed land in Florida which produces the grapes or other product used in producing wine; Be open to the public for tours, tastings, and sales at least 30 hours each week; and File the annual application and pay the annual registration fee of $100. The Florida Farm Winery Program is not only available to wineries making grape wine. The program is equally available to cideries, meadaries, and makers of wine from fresh fruit, berries, or other agricultural products. In each case, however, at least 60% of the wine must come from Florida agricultural products. Florida wineries that meet the requirements of the Florida Farm Winery Program must apply for certification by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Do you have questions about operating as a Florida Farm Winery? Contact us at contact@brewerlong.com to schedule a 15-minute introductory call at no charge. Because we’re attorneys: This blog post is provided on an “as is” and “as available” basis as of the date of publication. We disclaim any duty to update or correct any information contained in this blog post, including errors, even if we are notified about them. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we disclaim all representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied with respect to the information contained in this blog post, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title, non-infringement, accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. We will not be liable for damages of any kind arising from or in connection with your use of or reliance on this blog post, including, but not limited to, direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, and punitive damages. You agree to use this blog post at your own risk. Regarding your particular circumstances, we recommend that you consult your own legal counsel–hopefully BrewerLong.

Continue Reading
Breweries | Read Time: 4 minutes

COVID-19 is a Force Majeure Event – What Does That Mean?

Force Majeure: It’s Out of Control “Force majeure” is one of those legal terms that might be hard to explain (and spell), but you know it when you see it. The term literally means “superior force,” but it has come to mean any extraordinary event that is beyond the control of contracting parties. Force majeure events might include acts of God (like hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, or volcanic eruptions) as well as man-made circumstances (like war, riots, strikes, or government action). Many commercial contracts have a force majeure clause. The force majeure clause usually appears towards the end of the contract, with other miscellaneous or boilerplate terms. The purpose of a force majeure clause is to relieve one or both parties from performing certain duties during circumstances outside their control. A typical force majeure clause is: Force Majeure. A party shall not be liable for any failure of or delay in the performance of its obligations hereunder for the period that such failure or delay is due to causes beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to transportation or carrier delays, shortage of materials, shortage of labor, labor dispute, picketing, strike, unavailability of utility services, acts of God, acts of a public enemy, storm, flood, earthquake, tornado, hurricane, tsunami, other act of nature, fire, explosion, riot, protest, sabotage, pandemic outbreak, war, civil disturbance, political unrest, terrorist or other criminal act, embargo, judicial, executive, or other government order. If a delay continues for a period of more than sixty (60) days, either party may terminate the Agreement upon written notice to the other party, with all payments and liabilities accruing through the date of termination. COVID-19 Creates Multiple Force Majeure Events The worldwide spread of coronavirus, outbreaks of the COVID-19 disease, and government and industry measures to control the pandemic all create immediate force majeure events and the potential for future events. As of this writing (March 22, 2020), several state governments have imposed lockdowns on most face-to-face business and recreational activities, and all states have taken some measures to limit transmission of the coronavirus. In Florida, Governor DeSantis’ Executive Order No. 20-71 closes all restaurants and bars to on premises service. Restaurants and bars are prevented by government action from carrying out their normal business. However, many lease agreements require restaurants and bars to be open during certain hours and to continue business without interruption. The governor’s order creates a force majeure event that should relieve restaurants and bars from their lease obligation to stay open while the order remains effective. As more and more workers (or their family members) come down with COVID-19, labor shortages might follow. This could make it difficult for contractors to fulfill their contracted delivery schedules. For instance, if a contract brewer is required by contract to finish an order for contracted beer within a 45-day period, that might become difficult if all the brewers call in sick, are quarantined, or are required by a government order to stay home. Even if things are not so bad in Florida, for instance, the impacts of the disease in Washington could make it difficult for breweries to get hops for several months. These might create additional force majeure events. Read Your Force Majeure Clauses All business owners should pull out their contracts and look for the force majeure clauses. This is especially true for beverage industry members–breweries, wineries, distributors, and retailers–who are likely to be especially hard hit by COVID-19 and government intervention to control the pandemic. In reviewing a force majeure clause, focus on these questions: What circumstances or events are covered? Which party is relieved from liability because of a force majeure event? Is there a time limit on how long relief from liability continues? Is the party affected by the force majeure event required to notify the other party or take other steps? Does the continuation of a force majeure event give either or both parties the right to terminate the agreement or take other actions? A word of caution: While most commercial lease agreements do include a force majeure clause, in most cases they do not relieve a tenant from its obligation to pay rent during a force majeure event. However, every tenant should review the force majeure clause in its own lease agreement. Do you have questions about a force majeure clause in your contract? Contact us at contact@brewerlong.com to schedule a 15-minute introductory call at no charge. Because we’re attorneys: This blog post is provided on an “as is” and “as available” basis as of the date of publication. We disclaim any duty to update or correct any information contained in this blog post, including errors, even if we are notified about them. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we disclaim all representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied with respect to the information contained in this blog post, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title, non-infringement, accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. We will not be liable for damages of any kind arising from or in connection with your use of or reliance on this blog post, including, but not limited to, direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, and punitive damages. You agree to use this blog post at your own risk. Regarding your particular circumstances, we recommend that you consult your own legal counsel–hopefully BrewerLong.

Continue Reading
ABT | Read Time: 6 minutes

The Compliant Florida Beer Festival

Craft beer festivals are tremendously popular in Florida. The multiplication of beer festivals throughout the state has caused the state’s principal regulator of alcoholic beverages–the Florida Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco (the ABT)–to take a closer look at how beer festivals are operated. Like all activities involving alcohol beverages, Florida beer festivals are subject to a confusing web of state and local laws and ordinances. The following tips are intended to help organizers of Florida paid-admission beer festivals understand how state and local laws and ordinance may impact their festivals.

Continue Reading