ORDERS:
FINAL ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-4-520 (Supp. 1998) and S.C. Code Ann. § 61-6-1820 (Supp.
1998) upon a request for a contested case hearing. The petitioner, Michael Griffey, seeks an on-premises beer and wine
permit and a business sale and consumption minibottle license for his country inn located at 307 Church Street, Latta, South
Carolina. After three individuals filed written protests with the South Carolina Department of Revenue (DOR), and upon the
petitioner's request, this matter was transmitted by the DOR to the Administrative Law Judge Division (ALJD) for a hearing.
A hearing was held on August 5, 1999 at the ALJD in Columbia, South Carolina, after timely notice to the parties and the
protestants. The protestants were not present.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Having carefully considered the testimony and the arguments, and taking into account the credibility of the evidence, I make
the following Findings of Fact by a preponderance of the evidence:
1. Petitioner Michael Griffey of Eastwell Manor, Inc., d/b/a Abingdon Manor seeks an on-premises beer and
wine permit and a business sale and consumption minibottle license for his country inn located at 307 Church Street, Latta,
South Carolina, in Dillon County.
2. Prior to the hearing, the DOR moved to be excused from appearance at and participation in the hearing. In
that motion, the DOR noted it does not oppose the petitioner's application and would have granted the permit and the license
but for the protests. The DOR's motion to be excused was granted.
3. Notice of the time, date, place and subject matter of this hearing was given to the parties and the protestants.
4. The protestants failed to appear at the hearing. Lois Cook, protestant Cook's wife, notified the Division on
June 21, 1999 saying Reverend Cook had suffered a stroke and would be unable to participate in the hearing.
5. The proposed location is within the city limits of Latta in a predominately residential area.
6. The DOR has not previously issued an on-premises beer and wine permit or a business sale and consumption
minibottle license for this location.
7. There is no church, school, or public playground within 300 feet of the establishment.
8. The petitioner stated that the hours of operation will be Monday through Saturday from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00
p.m.. The establishment has a seating capacity of 40 in its dining area. The petitioner has already received a Class A
restaurant license by the Department of Health and Environmental Control for his establishment.
9. The proposed location is suitable for the issuance of the license and permit sought.
10. The petitioner is of good moral character. The State Law Enforcement Division completed a criminal
background investigation of the petitioner. The SLED report revealed no criminal violations, and the record before me does
not indicate that the petitioner has engaged in acts or conduct that imply the absence of good moral character.
11. The petitioner is at least twenty-one years of age, a U.S. citizen, and a citizen of the State of South Carolina.
Furthermore, the petitioner has maintained his principal residence in the state for at least thirty days prior to the date of
making application for the requested permits.
12. The petitioner has not had a beer and wine permit or a business sale and consumption minibottle license
revoked within two years of the date of his application.
13. The petitioner is a suitable person to be issued a permit.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude, as a matter of law, the following:
1. The South Carolina Administrative Law Judge Division has subject matter jurisdiction in this matter pursuant
to Chapter 23 of Title 1 of the 1976 Code, as amended.
2. S.C. Code Ann. section 61-4-520 (Supp. 1998) establishes the criteria for the issuance of a beer and wine
permit. S.C. Code Ann. section 61-6-1820 (Supp. 1998) establishes the criteria for the issuance of a business sale and
consumption minibottle license.
3. The petitioner meets the personal requirements of both sections, and may, thus, hold the requested permit and
license provided the location is suitable.
4. Although "proper location" is not statutorily defined, broad discretion is vested in the ALJD in determining
the fitness or suitability of a particular location. See Fast Stops, Inc. v. Ingram, 276 S.C. 593, 281 S.E.2d 118 (1981); Byers
v. South Carolina ABC Comm'n, 281 S.C. 566, 316 S.E.2d 705 (Ct. App. 1984).
5. The determination of the 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); Schudel v. South
Carolina ABC Comm'n, 276 S.C. 138, 276 S.E.2d 308 (1981).
6. There is no evidence that the operation of the proposed location or the sale and consumption of liquor, beer,
and wine will have an adverse impact upon the surrounding community. Without evidence of an adverse impact on the
community, the application must not be denied if the statutory criteria are satisfied. The fact that the issuance of a permit or
license is protested is not a sufficient reason by itself to deny the application. See 48 Am. Jur. 2d Intoxicating Liquors § 162
(Supp. 1998); 48 C.J.S. Intoxicating Liquors § 119 (1981). Furthermore, by failing to appear at the hearing, the protestants
have effectively abandoned their protests. See S.C. Code Ann. § 61-4-525 (Supp. 1998) and S.C. Code Ann. § 61-6-1825
(Supp. 1998).
7. Based upon the totality of the evidence presented, the proposed location is a suitable and proper one to be
licensed to sell and serve liquor, beer, and wine.
THEREFORE, the DOR shall issue the on-premises beer and wine permit and a business sale and consumption minibottle
license to the petitioner for his establishment located at 307 Church Street, Latta, South Carolina.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
C. DUKES SCOTT
Administrative Law Judge
Post Office Box 11667
Columbia, South Carolina 29211-1667
August 5, 1999
Columbia, South Carolina |
