ORDERS:
FINAL ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-2-260 (Supp. 1997) and
S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310, et seq. (1986 & Supp. 1997), upon Petitioner's application for an
off-premises beer and wine permit for the premises at 4811 Highway 11, Inman, South Carolina.
Respondent South Carolina Department of Revenue ("DOR") does not oppose Petitioner's
application, and this tribunal granted DOR's motion to be excused from appearing at the hearing.
After notice to the parties, a hearing was conducted on April 21, 1998. Petitioner failed to appear
at the hearing. Fingerville United Methodist Church, protestant of record, also failed to appear at
the hearing.
I find Petitioner in default under ALJD Rule 23 for failure to appear at the April 21, 1998
hearing. I find and conclude that dismissal of this case is appropriate under ALJD Rule 23 and
that DOR is not required to process Petitioner's application for a beer and wine permit.
FINDINGS OF FACT
By a preponderance of the evidence, I make the following findings of fact:
1. On May 1, 1997, Petitioner Anjay R. Patel filed an application with DOR for an off-premises beer and wine permit for the premises located at 4811 Highway 11, Inman, South
Carolina.
2. All parties were given notice of the time, date and place of the hearing.
3. Petitioner received notice of the hearing by certified mail, return receipt requested, on
March 14, 1998.
4. Petitioner failed to appear at the hearing or communicate with the Court to request a
continuance.
5. The protestant, Fingerville United Methodist Church, received notice of the hearing by
certified mail, return receipt requested, on March 14, 1998.
6. No representative of Fingerville United Methodist Church appeared at the hearing or
communicated with the Court to request a continuance.
7. In its Agency Transmittal, DOR advised this tribunal that Petitioner appeared to have met
all statutory requirements, and but for the protest challenging the suitability of the proposed
location, DOR would have issued the permit.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude as a matter of law:
1. The Administrative Law Judge Division has subject matter jurisdiction of this case
pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-2-260 (Supp. 1997) and S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310, et seq.
(1986 & Supp. 1997).
2. Petitioner is in default under ALJD Rule 23 for failure to appear at the April 21, 1998
hearing.
3. The protestant, Fingerville United Methodist Church, is in default under ALJD Rule 23
for failure to appear at the April 21, 1998 hearing.
4. Pursuant to ALJD Rule 23, an Administrative Law Judge may dismiss a case adversely to
a defaulting party.
5. South Carolina Code Ann. § 61-4-520 (Supp. 1997) establishes the criteria for the
issuance of a beer and wine permit. Included among the factors for consideration is the
suitability of the location.
6. As the permit applicant, Petitioner has the burden of proving that the proposed location is
suitable for the issuance of a beer and wine permit. See 2 Am.Jur.2d Administrative Law § 360
(1994).
7. Because Petitioner failed to appear at the hearing and failed to submit any evidence
regarding the suitability of the proposed location, dismissal of the case is appropriate under
ALJD Rule 23.
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this case is dismissed pursuant to ALJD Rule 23.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that DOR shall not process the application filed by
Petitioner for an off-premises beer and wine permit for the location at 4811 Highway 11, Inman,
South Carolina.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
STEPHEN P. BATES
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
May 7, 1998
Columbia, South Carolina |
