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

Elwood A. Miles, d/b/a Al's Place vs. SCDOR

South Carolina Department of Revenue

Elwood A. Miles, d/b/a Al's Place

South Carolina Department of Revenue

Elwood A. Miles (pro se), Applicant



This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-6-320 (Supp. 1993) and

§§ 1-23-310, et seq. (Rev. 1986 & Supp. 1993) upon a renewal of an on-premises beer and wine permit for 7776 Edmund Highway, Pelion, South Carolina, filed by Elwood A. Miles with the South Carolina Department of Revenue and Taxation (hereinafter referred to as "DOR"). A hearing was held on February 7, 1995. The issues under consideration were: the suitability of the proposed business location and the nature of the proposed business activity. Although timely notice had been given, no protestants appeared at the hearing. The permit renewal is granted.


By a preponderance of the evidence, I find:

(1) The applicant seeks an on-premises beer and wine permit renewal for a location at 7776 Edmund Highway, Pelion, South Carolina, having filed for a renewal of

Permit # BW429649 with DOR, and paying the requisite renewal fee.

(2) Donnette Jeffcoat submitted to DOR a written protest to the permit renewal.

(3) Notice of the time, date, place, and subject matter of the hearing was given to the applicant and protestant (by certified mail) and DOR.

(4) The hearing was scheduled to commence at 3:30 p.m., February 7, 1995.

At 3:45 p.m., the hearing began.

(5) Neither Donnette Jeffcoat nor any other protestants were present at the hearing to testify in opposition to the application renewal. Ms. Jeffcoat made no contact with the Court to request a continuance and did not inform the Court that she would not appear.

(6) Applicant has been operating the business location under the current permit since October, 14, 1993.

(7) DOR would have issued the permit renewal but for the protest of Ms. Jeffcoat.

(8) Applicant has not been cited for any violations of alcoholic beverage laws since being licensed.


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) 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).

(4) Pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 7-90 (Supp. 1993), a hearing must be held when the issuance or renewal of a beer and wine permit is protested.

(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.2d 335 (1985).

(7) The record is devoid of any evidence to suggest the proposed location is unsuitable or improper.

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

(9) Protestant's failure to appear constitutes default under Rule 23 of the Temporary Operating Procedures of the Administrative Law Judge Division.


IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that DOR issue to Applicant a renewal of his on-premises beer and wine permit.




February _____, 1995

Columbia, South Carolina

Brown Bldg.






Copyright © 2022 South Carolina Administrative Law Court