Lunazul Lawsuit | The “100% Agave” Cases Spread Again
Tequila / Litigation
Tequila’s “100% Agave” Lawsuits Have Spread to Lunazul
A year ago this was a story about two Diageo brands. It is now a docket. Lunazul has been hit with a second federal class action alleging its tequila contains ethanol that did not come from agave, and one of the complaints makes a much larger claim: that the numbers across the whole category do not add up. Every allegation below is unproven and denied.
By Vim, Editor of 12×75
In brief
- Heaven Hill’s Lunazul faces two proposed class actions. The first, in Florida, alleges NMR testing found isotopic signatures inconsistent with pure agave ethanol. Heaven Hill filed a motion to dismiss on 29 January 2026.
- A second, Dubreu and Sava v Heaven Hill Distilleries and Tierra de Agaves, was filed in Illinois federal court on 7 May 2026, with an Illinois class and a California subclass.
- The same allegation has now been made against Don Julio and Casamigos (Diageo, which calls the claims baseless), Teremana and Costco’s Kirkland Signature.
- The second Lunazul complaint goes further than any of them, arguing the mislabeling is a “widespread industry practice” because the volume of 100% agave tequila sold is “mathematically irreconcilable” with Mexico’s agave supply.
- Nothing has been proven. No court has ruled on the merits, the testing methodology is contested, and every company involved denies the allegations.
When I wrote about Casamigos and Don Julio earlier this month, I noted that both were named in contested class actions and that the point did not separate them, because they were in identical positions. That framing is now out of date, and not because anything has been decided. It is out of date because the list has got considerably longer.
The same is true of the additives investigation I published earlier this year, and of every bottle on my additive-free list, which now looks less like a purity fad and more like a hedge. Lunazul, Heaven Hill’s Mexican tequila brand and one of the fastest-growing million-case tequilas in America, is now defending two proposed class actions making the same core allegation: that laboratory analysis found ethanol in the bottle that did not come from agave, despite every label saying 100% agave. Heaven Hill is fighting them. The claims are unproven. But the pattern is the story now, and one of the Lunazul complaints contains an argument that should concern the entire category rather than one brand.
What is actually alleged
Two separate cases, both proposed class actions, both against Heaven Hill Distilleries and, in the second, its Mexican production partner Tierra de Agaves.
Lunazul: the first case
PlaintiffSylvain, Florida
DefendantHeaven Hill Distilleries
Core allegationThat Lunazul is marketed as 100% Blue Weber agave while containing ethanol derived from non-agave sources
Evidence citedNuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) testing said to show isotopic signatures inconsistent with pure agave ethanol
ClaimsDeceptive advertising, misrepresentation, negligence, unjust enrichment, unfair trade practices, Florida consumer law
SoughtDamages, refunds, an order halting the marketing and requiring ingredient disclosure
DefenceHeaven Hill filed a motion to dismiss on 29 January 2026
Reported by The Spirits Business and Top Class Actions.
Lunazul: the second case
PlaintiffsMariana Dubreu and Traian Sava
DefendantsHeaven Hill Distilleries (dba Premium Imports) and Tierra de Agaves S.A. de C.V.
Filed7 May 2026, US District Court, Northern District of Illinois
ScopeIllinois class plus a California subclass, citing the Consumers Legal Remedies Act and California’s False Advertising Law
Evidence citedIsotope analysis said to show the tequila is not produced from 100% agave sugars
Additional argumentThat mislabeling is a widespread industry practice, not a single-brand failing
From the complaint as published by ClassAction.org.
The consumer logic in both is the same, and it is the reason these cases exist at all. Tequila labeled 100% agave commands a premium over mixto, which may legally contain up to 49% non-agave sugars. The complaints argue that a reasonable shopper reads “100% agave” to mean exactly what it says: every drop from fermented agave sugar, with no cane or corn introduced at any stage. If that is not what is in the bottle, the plaintiffs say, the premium was paid for nothing. Lunazul retails at roughly $24 to $44.
The argument that should worry the whole category
Most of these complaints are about one brand. The Dubreu filing is not, and this is the part worth reading twice. It alleges that mislabeling tequila as 100% agave is a “widespread industry practice,” and it offers a reason: that the volume of 100% agave tequila produced in recent years is, in the complaint’s word, “mathematically irreconcilable” with the supply of agave in Mexico, which has been squeezed by weather and by a decade of surging demand.
The claim is not that one distillery cut corners. It is that the arithmetic of the entire category does not work.
That is an allegation, not a finding, and it is the sort of sweeping claim plaintiffs’ lawyers make to establish a pattern. But it is checkable in principle, and it is the reason this has stopped being a story about individual brands. If agave supply genuinely cannot support the volume of 100%-agave tequila on shelves, either the supply figures are wrong, the volume figures are wrong, or something is going into bottles that should not be. A court may never resolve which. The question is now in the public record either way.
The complaints also make a point about regulation that is uncomfortable and, as far as I can tell, accurate: the US Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau approves labels but does not verify their compositional accuracy. Plaintiffs argue consumers therefore have no meaningful federal recourse, which is precisely why these disputes are being fought in consumer-protection class actions rather than by a regulator.
Who else has been sued
This is the docket as it stands. Every entry is an allegation. Every defendant denies it, and no court has ruled on the merits of any of them.
The 100% agave cases
Lunazul (Heaven Hill)Two proposed class actions, Florida and IllinoisNMR and isotope testing alleged to show non-agave ethanol. Heaven Hill moved to dismiss the first case in January 2026.
Don Julio and Casamigos (Diageo)New York and FloridaDiageo filed motions to dismiss in November 2025, calling the allegations “baseless” and saying its tequilas are 100% Blue Weber agave and fully certified.
Teremana (Siete Bucks Spirits)Tomescu v Siete Bucks Spirits, Northern District of IllinoisAlleges SNIF-NMR analysis found isotope signatures in Teremana Blanco inconsistent with ethanol derived exclusively from agave, and separately challenges the “small batch” and “handcrafted” claims.
Kirkland Signature (Costco)Proposed class actionAlleges the store-brand tequila is falsely advertised as 100% blue agave.
Presented as filed allegations. Nothing here has been proven, motions to dismiss are pending or undecided in several cases, and the reliability of the testing methods relied on is itself disputed by the defendants.
There is a Mexican strand too. In September 2025 Remberto Galván, formerly a spokesman for the Mexican Agave Council, petitioned the government to investigate retailers and the Tequila Regulatory Council itself, alleging adulterated tequila was being sold as 100% agave and that the CRT was failing in its duty. He said four bottles had been tested in Mexico and then at the Eurofins laboratory in France. That is a separate process in a separate jurisdiction, and it is unresolved.
How the testing works, and why it is contested
The science behind every one of these cases is isotope analysis, usually site-specific natural isotope fractionation by nuclear magnetic resonance, which the filings abbreviate to SNIF-NMR. The principle is sound and long-established in food fraud work: plants fix carbon by different photosynthetic pathways, and agave, sugarcane and corn leave measurably different isotopic fingerprints in the ethanol they produce. Test the ethanol, and in theory you can tell what plant it came from.
Why the defendants contest it. The disputes are about application rather than principle: which reference database the results are measured against, whether the samples were handled and stored correctly, whether natural variation in agave can produce results outside an expected range, and whether a commissioned test by a plaintiff’s expert meets the evidentiary standard. Heaven Hill and Diageo both point to certification by Mexico’s regulator, the CRT, which polices the 100% agave designation at source. Both things can be true at once: the method can be legitimate and a specific result can still be challenged.
This is why I have been careful in everything I have written about tequila additives and about Casamigos and Don Julio not to treat a lab result cited in a complaint as a finding of fact. It is evidence a plaintiff intends to rely on. A judge has not yet decided whether it is admissible, let alone whether it is right.
Why Lunazul, and why now
Lunazul is not an obvious target in the sense of being famous. It is an obvious target in the sense of being big and growing fast. Founded in 2002 and produced at the Tierra de Agaves distillery in Jalisco, it passed a million nine-litre cases for the first time in 2023, then sold 1.7 million in 2024, a 37% rise that was the largest percentage increase of any million-case tequila brand that year, making it the ninth biggest-selling tequila in the world. Heaven Hill also owns Ocho Tequila, having bought its parent in 2022.
That trajectory is the point. A brand growing 37% in a year in a category where the premium end is deflating is a brand selling a great deal more liquid than it used to, and the complaints’ central argument is about exactly that: whether the agave exists to support the growth the industry has reported. Fast growth also means a large class of purchasers, which is what makes a consumer class action worth filing.
What this means if you drink tequila
Practically, less than the headlines suggest, and I want to be careful not to overstate it. No regulator has withdrawn any product. No court has found any brand mislabeled. Every company involved denies the allegations and several have moved to dismiss. If you have a bottle of Lunazul, Teremana, Don Julio or Casamigos at home, nothing about these filings tells you it is not what the label says.
What the cases do change is the value of verification. There is a difference between a brand certified 100% agave by the CRT, which all of these are, and a brand independently verified as additive-free by a third party, which is a separate and voluntary standard. The bottles on my additive-free list have chosen to be checked by someone with no commercial interest in the answer. That was a nice-to-have eighteen months ago. In a category where the composition of the liquid is now a live legal question, it starts to look like the main reason to choose one bottle over another.
The other practical response is the one I keep arriving at from a different direction each time: the bottles that consistently win on taste, the ones at the top of my ranking, tend to be small producers with transparent production, published NOMs and no incentive to stretch anything. They are also usually cheaper than the celebrity bottles. The litigation is not why you should buy them. It is just one more argument.
Quick answers
Is Lunazul being sued?
Heaven Hill Distilleries, which owns Lunazul, is defending two proposed class actions alleging the tequila is not 100% agave as labeled. Heaven Hill filed a motion to dismiss the first in January 2026. The allegations are unproven and the company disputes them.
What do the tequila lawsuits allege?
That brands marketed as 100% Blue Weber agave contain ethanol derived from other sources such as corn or sugarcane, based on isotope testing, and that consumers therefore paid a premium for something the label did not accurately describe.
Which tequila brands have been sued?
Lunazul (Heaven Hill), Don Julio and Casamigos (Diageo), Teremana (Siete Bucks Spirits) and Costco’s Kirkland Signature have all faced proposed class actions making versions of the same allegation. All deny it; none has been proven.
Has any of this been proven?
No. No court has ruled on the merits of any of these cases. Several defendants have filed motions to dismiss, and the testing methodology relied on by plaintiffs is itself disputed.
What is SNIF-NMR testing?
Site-specific natural isotope fractionation by nuclear magnetic resonance, a technique used in food and drink authentication that can indicate the botanical origin of ethanol. It is established science, but its application in these cases, including reference data and sample handling, is contested.
Does 100% agave certification mean anything?
Yes. Mexico’s Tequila Regulatory Council certifies the designation at source, and all the brands named remain certified. The plaintiffs argue certification and US label approval do not guarantee compositional accuracy, which is the question the courts have been asked to consider.
The last word
A year ago I could write that two brands were facing an unusual legal claim and note it as a curiosity. Now there are at least five brands, two jurisdictions, a regulator being petitioned in Mexico, and a filed allegation that the entire category’s arithmetic does not work. None of it is proven and all of it is denied, and I would ask anyone reading to hold both of those facts firmly.
But litigation clusters are informative even before they resolve. The industry spent a decade persuading the world that 100% agave was worth paying for, and it worked so well that the phrase became the whole marketing proposition of a category that grew faster than almost anything in drinks. A claim that valuable was always going to get tested eventually. It is being tested now, by consumer lawyers rather than regulators, which tells you something about who is minding the shop.
Nothing has been proven. But the industry built its premium on four words, and four words are now in front of four courts.
Sources
- The Spirits Business: Heaven Hill challenges 100% agave lawsuit (February 2026)
- ClassAction.org: Lunazul lawsuit claims tequila not 100% agave as advertised
- Dubreu et al v Heaven Hill Distilleries et al, complaint as filed 7 May 2026
- Top Class Actions: first Lunazul class action
- Top Class Actions: second Lunazul class action
- Top Class Actions: Teremana class action
This article describes allegations made in civil complaints that have not been tested in court. All defendants deny the allegations; several have filed motions to dismiss. Nothing here should be read as a finding that any product is mislabeled. Correct as of 16 September 2026. Please drink responsibly.
