Dahl & Napa Point Winery Object To Napa Court Ruling On Wine & Tanks

December 11, 2014 | Filed under Featured Articles | Posted by Lewis Perdue

Robert Dahl and his Napa Point Winery LLC were ordered last week to turn over wine and wine tanks to Lexington Street Investments LLC, but have challenged the decision.

Dahl’s attorney has objected to by Napa Superior Court, Judge Rodney Stone’s tentative ruling and that sends the matter back to the judge who said he will “take it under advisement.”

As previously reported by Wine Industry Insight, the ruling comes as the result of Lexington Street’s request for a “Writ of Possession” that would allow them to seize property collateral that they say is subject to their UCC lien.

Dahl’s attorney previously stated that Dahl would give Lexington access to the collateral. However, that has not occurred which is why, according to Lexington’s filings, it requested the writ.

The ruling that Dahl’s attorney objected to was actually a partial victory for his client because the judge rejected Lexington Street’s request to seize bank funds and a number of vehicles that Lexington alleges were purchased with its loan money.

Lexington Charges Dahl Is Selling Its Secured Collateral

In a separate filing, Lexington Street charges that Dahl is currently trying to sell wine tanks as “free and clear of liens” when those tanks are actually encumbered by its liens. Dahl’s court documents says those allegations are false and that the tanks he is currently selling are his.

Issue Complicated By Multiple Companies

Complicating the issue is Dahl’s contention that the loans were usurious and invalid. Further, the collateral in question was owned by one of Dahl’s previous companies — The Patio Wine Company — which is no longer in operation. Lexington contends that Patio Wine Company assets are now in the possession of Napa Point Winery.

Dahl’s legal filings deny that contention and argue that there is no legal connection between Patio Wine Company and Napa Point Winery.

Usury Case Argued in Santa Clara County

In a separate Santa Clara Superior Court case, Dahl has argued that the $1.2 million in loans that Lexington made to Patio (and guaranteed personally by Dahl) carried usurious interest rates. Because of that, Dahl argues that the loans are essentially invalid. While that is an over-simplification of a serpentine case, the matter is explored in detail in our previous 6,231-word article.

A request to combine the Napa lawsuit with the Santa Clara case and moved to Santa Clara was scheduled for yesterday (Dec. 9). We are awaiting word on the results of that hearing.

We are also waiting for word on Napa Superior Court Judge Stone’s decision.