Original jurisdiction in case of Pennsylvania Tavern Association and P.U.B.L.I.C., an unincorporated association, by Robert E. Weaver, Vince ReDavid, Robert P. Latchaw, Barney Jardin, Fred Stair, Martin T. Schober, Paul Harding, William Latchaw, William Stafford, Horace Rost, Jr. and James K. Cavanaugh, Trustees Ad Litem, v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board.
John H. Bream, for plaintiffs.
Sidney A. Simon, Special Assistant Attorney General, with him Harry Bowytz, Chief Counsel, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for defendant.
President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer, Wilkinson, Jr., Mencer, Rogers and Blatt. Opinion by Judge Mencer.
[ 21 Pa. Commw. Page 102]
From the very sparse record in this case, it can be gleaned that, on May 8, 1972, the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (Board) issued three identical citations against three Lancaster County beer distributors: Elemar,
[ 21 Pa. Commw. Page 103]
Inc., Garrett Hill Beverage Co., Inc., and Railsplitter, Inc., all trading as Thrifty Beverage. Each was charged with having "permitted a person who has an interest in another Distributor or Importing Distributor License to have an interest in your licensed business."*fn1
On August 25, 1972, the Board suspended all three licenses for a period of twenty-one days or until such time as all of the illegal interests had been divested. The licensees appealed to the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, which sustained the suspensions. A subsequent appeal to this Court was withdrawn.
On November 14, 1974, the Pennsylvania Tavern Association and P.U.B.L.I.C., an unincorporated association, by eleven individual licensees of the Board, (plaintiffs) brought this collateral action in mandamus in the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County to compel the Board to enforce the original court-approved orders and penalties. It was stipulated of record that, on January 15, 1975, the Board, on petition of the licensees, took action to vacate the suspension of their licenses and to modify the penalty to a fine of $1,000 in each case.*fn2
The Board filed only two preliminary objections to the complaint. Because of the first preliminary objection which concerned the jurisdiction of the Court of Common
[ 21 Pa. Commw. Page 104]
Pleas of Dauphin County, the case was properly ...