Law on Posted Alcohol Warnings Upheld

The state Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for Los Angeles and other California communities to require restaurants, bars and liquor stores to post warnings that consuming alcoholic beverages during pregnancy may cause birth defects.

With one dissenting vote, the court rejected an appeal brought by the California Restaurant Assn. of a landmark ordinance enacted in June, 1986, by the Los Angeles City Council.

In a brief order, the justices let stand a ruling by a state Court of Appeal upholding the measure as a legally valid way of warning that liquor has “potentially dire consequences” for pregnant women. The justices’ action makes the appellate decision binding on trial courts throughout the state.

The City Council had cited medical research indicating that alcohol consumption during pregnancy may cause irreversible adverse effects on the fetus--including mental retardation, facial abnormalities and defects in heart and bone structure.

After the city’s action, similar legislation requiring posted warnings where beer, wine and other alcoholic beverages are sold was adopted by the counties of Los Angeles and San Diego and the cities of Long Beach and Santa Monica.

Annette Keller, an assistant city attorney for Los Angeles, welcomed the court’s action Thursday, noting that the issue had attracted “significant interest” throughout the state. Attorneys from several communities had contacted Los Angeles authorities, indicating that they might proceed with their own measures if the city’s ordinance was upheld, she said.

“We were not surprised by the court’s action,” she said. “We believed the correct result had been reached by the Court of Appeal and the trial court in this case.”

Gerald Breitbart, a spokesman for the restaurant association, acknowledged that the potential effect of alcohol on an unborn child is a “recognized problem.” But any warnings would be more effective coming from physicians, he said, and any governmental intervention should come from the state.

“It’s a state problem--and the state doesn’t see any necessity for it,” he said, noting that the Legislature has refused to require warnings on alcoholic beverage containers.

“Essentially what this is is an effort . . . to label alcohol. They can’t get their label on the bottle, so they try to get it posted at the sales point.”

The Los Angeles ordinance requires those selling liquor to post a sign at least eight inches by eight inches that says: “Warning. Drinking Wine, Beer and Other Alcoholic Beverages During Pregnancy Can Cause Birth Defects.”

In the legal challenge brought by the 8,900-member restaurant association, attorneys argued that the ordinance violates provisions of the state Constitution giving the state exclusive authority to regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Warren H. Deering rejected the association’s contention and refused to prevent the city from requiring the posted warnings.

The Court of Appeal upheld Deering’s ruling in an opinion written by Appellate Justice Robert R. Devich and joined by Appellate Justices Vaino Spencer and Campbell M. Lucas.

The appellate court found that such ordinances are permissible when they “do not directly affect” the ability to sell alcoholic beverages. “The (ordinance) does not regulate the sale or purchase of an alcoholic beverage, but rather seeks to avert tragedy by warning that drinking alcohol during pregnancy can cause birth defects,” Devich wrote.

The panel also rejected the argument that the city was trying to usurp the role of the state in an effort to “promote temperance.”

The ordinance “merely warns a specific group of potential consumers that a decision to consume an alcoholic beverage has potentially dire consequences,” Devich said.

In a subsequent appeal to the state Supreme Court, the association warned that unless the appellate decision is overturned, it could result in a “hodgepodge” of conflicting local regulations on the sale of alcohol.

The ruling could even be used as a basis to require liquor sellers to “dispense contraceptive devices with the sale of alcohol” or to post a warning that alcohol “may cause liver disease,” the association said.

The order denying review of the case Thursday was signed by Acting Chief Justice Edward A. Panelli. Justice Stanley Mosk voted to hear the case.

In other action Thursday, the court:

- Ordered that attorney Robert L. Beery of Rohnert Park be suspended from practicing law for two years and make restitution of $35,000 to a former client for engaging in an improper business practice with the client.

- Held that James Ellis Schneider, a San Diego lawyer, be suspended from practicing law for 30 days for professional misconduct.