Case Title: Bronco Wine v. Jolly

Citation: 

Docket Number: S113136M

State: california

Court: California Supreme Court

Date: 2004-10-13T00:00:00Z

Document:
Filed 10/13/04 
 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 
BRONCO WINE COMPANY et al.,  
) 
 
 
) 
 
Petitioners, 
) 
 
 
) 
 
v. 
) 
 
 
) 
JERRY R. JOLLY, as 
) 
S113136 
Director, etc., et al.,  
) 
 
) 
Ct.App. 3, No. C037254 
 
Respondents; 
) 
___________________________________ ) 
 
 
) 
 
NAPA VALLEY VINTNERS 
) 
ORDER MODIFYING OPINION 
ASSOCIATION,  
) 
[NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT] 
 
 
) 
 
Intervener.  
) 
____________________________________) 
 
BY THE COURT: 
The opinion herein, appearing at 33 Cal.4th 943, is modified as follows: 
1.  In the sentence beginning on page 951 and continuing on page 952, the 
word "almost" is inserted between the words "used" and "exclusively," so that the 
sentence reads, "Under Bronco's ownership, all three of these brands have been 
used almost exclusively to sell wines made from grapes grown outside Napa 
County." 
2.  In the second sentence of footnote 5 on page 952, the term "scientific 
surveys" is replaced with the term "survey results," so that the sentence reads, 
"The Legislature's findings to the contrary, however, are supported both by 
testimony and survey results presented at the hearings disclosing consumer 
confusion relating to such labels." 
3.  In the first sentence of the last partial paragraph on page 978, the word 
"any" between the words "preempt" and "more" is deleted, so that the sentence 
reads, "Bronco further suggests that subsequent to the enactment of 27 United 
States Code section 205(e) in August 1935 and the adoption, by agencies within 
the Department of the Treasury, of implementing regulations, both Congress and 
the federal regulators manifested intent that the federal wine labeling regulations 
would preempt more stringent state wine labeling regulations." 
4.  In the last two sentences of the full paragraph on page 980 and the 
citation between the sentences, the words "additionally and broadly" between the 
words "regulation" and "barred" are deleted, the word " 'production' " is replaced 
with the word "sale," the reference to section 6 in the citation is deleted, and the 
words "for wines produced" between the words "barred" and "in" are deleted, so 
that these sentences and citation read, "Third, by 1942, a California regulation 
barred the sale of wines labeled with so-called coined (or semi-generic) brand 
names if the 'brand designation resembles an established wine type name such as  
. . . Madeira, . . . Port, . . . Claret, [or] Burgundy, etc. . . . '  (See 1942 Regs., art. II, 
§ 8.)  Under this and subsequent versions of the same regulation, a label such as 
'Burgundy brand' was long barred in California.50" 
5.  In the second sentence of the first paragraph on page 981, the words "for 
wines produced in California" between the words "prohibited" and "name," 
together with the accompanying commas, are deleted, so that the sentence reads, 
"The third provision described above prohibited name types that the federal 
regulations have permitted since 1941 upon a proper showing." 
The modification does not affect the judgment.