Legal Departments of the Year, Regulatory, Emerging Companies: Instacart
Lawyers in-house at Instacart cleared the way through thorny regulations to get approval for alcohol delivery to customers in more than ten states.
November 13, 2017 at 03:45 AM
3 minute read
Photo Credit: Instacart
In-house lawyers at San Francisco-based Instacart Inc. have grown accustomed to navigating the legal and regulatory challenges of facilitating grocery delivery from retail partners to customers. Instacart has been making sure that app users can get their shopping done at the click of a button via personal shoppers since 2012.
But when the company opted to expand into alcohol delivery in recent years, it has faced a whole new maze of regulatory requirements. The legal team has led the charge, working with regulators and other stakeholders on the state and municipal levels to get the proper clearances for Instacart's shoppers to deliver alcohol to customers. As of October 2017, Instacart users in more than 10 states can order booze right to their doorsteps.
Rebekah Punak, Instacart's deputy general counsel, said that her in-house legal team of nine, with outside counsel assistance, has “divided and conquered,” going jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction to secure approval for Instacart, which does not itself have a liquor license, to perform last-mile alcohol delivery on behalf of its retail partners.
Punak said alcohol delivery initiated by third-party platforms that are neither retailers nor liquor license holders was “not something that regulators had necessarily thought about” when approached by Instacart. So her team has had to carry out close dialogues with state and municipal officials, including state alcohol bureaus—at times soliciting their opinions through formal letters.
And even when alcohol delivery is permitted in an area, there are numerous jurisdictional boundaries and technicalities that have to be considered, according to Punak. For example, in the state of Texas, she said, some areas are totally dry, with no alcohol delivery allowed, while others are “damp” and only allow some types of alcohol to be delivered.
Dealing with the many geographical nuances involved in liquor law has required creative and home-brewed solutions.
Punak said that her team “has really built some industry unique tools to make sure [Instacart is] fully compliant with all the layers of requirements out there.”
She cited the work of Ryan Black, Instacart's senior legal operations manager, who has built internal technology tools that the company uses to evaluate applicable jurisdictional restrictions to decide whether alcohol can be delivered to Instacart users in a given area.
Punak said that her team has had to figure out the regulatory approval process for alcohol pretty quickly, and they have their sights set on moving this aspect of their services into new areas.
“In an ideal world we'd be able to deliver alcohol for our partners everywhere, so every state we're not currently in we would like to be in,” she said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBlake Lively's claims that movie co-star launched smear campaign gets support in publicist's suit
4 minute readSolana Labs Co-Founder Allegedly Pocketed Ex-Wife’s ‘Millions of Dollars’ of Crypto Gains
4 minute readThe end of the 'Rust' criminal case against Alec Baldwin may unlock a civil lawsuit
Trending Stories
- 1A&O Shearman Corporate Partner Heads to Jones Day
- 2Funding Rebound: The Top 2024 Legal Tech Investments
- 3Presidential Pardons: A Tool That Can be Used to Move Forward
- 4Some of 2024's Most Notable GC Moves Were Drenched in Drama
- 5Will 2025 Bring a Change to Lawyers' Mandatory Pro Bono Duties Under 'Madden'?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250