South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

Lori Jones, d/b/a Peaches Nite Spot vs. SCDOR

South Carolina Department of Revenue

Lori Jones, d/b/a Peaches Nite Spot

South Carolina Department of Revenue

Lori Jones (pro se), Applicant



This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1993) and

§ 1-23-310, et seq., upon an application for an on-premises beer and wine permit and business sale and consumption licnese for 772 Hampshire Drive, Gaffney, South Carolina, by Lori Jones filed with the South Carolina Department of Revenue and Taxation (hereinafter referred to as "DOR").

A hearing was held on September 14, 1994. The issues considered were: (1) the applicant's eligibility to hold a permit; (2) the suitability of the proposed business location; and

(3) the nature of the proposed business activity. Although timely notice had been given, no protestants appeared at the hearing. The permit and license applications are granted.


By a preponderance of the evidence, I find:

(1) The applicant seeks an on-premises beer and wine permit and business sale and consumption license for a location at 772 Hampshire Drive, Gaffney, South Carolina, having filed applications with DOR, AI #98538 and AI #98537, on April 26, 1994.

(2) Notice of the time, date, place, and subject matter of the hearing was given to the applicant, protestants, and DOR.

(3) No protestants were present to testify in opposition to the application at the hearing.

(4) Applicant is currently operating the proposed location as a restaurant, primarily and substantially involved in the preparation and service of meals, and intends to continue as such.

(5) The proposed location is currently and has been previously licensed to sell and serve alcoholic beverages.

(6) The proposed location is located on a frontage road adjacent to Interstate 85 and is surrounded by commercial businesses, including another licensed location.

(7) There are no churches, schools, playgrounds, or residences within 500 feet of the proposed location.

(8) The applicant is over twenty-one years of age, is a citizen of the State of South Carolina, and has maintained her principal residence in South Carolina for more than one year.

(9) The applicant has not had a permit/license revoked in the last five years.

(10) The applicant, and her manager, Clyde Green, are of good moral character.

(11) Notice of the application appeared in a newspaper of general circulation in the area of the proposed location for three consecutive weeks and was posted at the proposed location for fifteen days.


Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude as a matter of law the following:

(1) S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1993) provides that the South Carolina Administrative Law Judge Division is empowered to hear this case pursuant to Chapter 23 of Title I of the 1976 Code, as amended.

(2) S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1993) provides the criteria to be met by an applicant for a beer and wine permit in South Carolina.

(3) S.C. Code Ann. §§ 61-5-50 and 61-3-440 (Supp. 1993) set forth the requirements for a minibottle license.

(4) A permit or license must not be issued if an applicant does not meet the standards of S.C. Code Ann. § 61-3-730 (Supp. 1993).

(5) As the trier of fact, an administrative law judge is authorized to determine the fitness or suitability of the proposed business location of an applicant for a permit to sell beer and wine

using broad but not unbridled discretion. Ronald F. Byers v. S.C. ABC Commission, 316 S.E.2d 705 (S.C. App. 1984).

(6) The determination of suitability of a location is not necessarily a function solely of geography. It involves an infinite variety of considerations related to the nature and operation of the proposed business and its impact on the community within which it is to be located. Kearney v. Allen, 287 S.C. 324, 338 S.E. 335 (1985).

(7) The proposed location is suitable and proper, in lieu of the commercial nature of the area.

(8) Applicant meets the statutory requirements for issuance of a beer and wine permit and minibottle license.


IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that DOR issue to Applicant an on-premises beer and

wine permit upon payment of the prescribed fee and bond.




September 20, 1994

Columbia, South Carolina

Brown Bldg.






Copyright © 2022 South Carolina Administrative Law Court