Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MATTER CIRO'S LOUNGE (05/24/76)

decided: May 24, 1976.

IN THE MATTER OF: CIRO'S LOUNGE, INC., 1436 SNYDER AVENUE, PHILADELPHIA, PA. 19145. CIRO'S LOUNGE, INC., APPELLANT


Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County in case of In the Matter of Revocation of Restaurant Liquor License No. R-5400 and Amusement Permit No. AP-23051, issued to Ciro's Lounge, Inc., No. 74-11-2069.

COUNSEL

A. Charles Peruto, for appellant.

J. Leonard Langan, Assistant Attorney General, with him Harry Bowytz, Chief Counsel, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for appellee.

Judges Crumlish, Jr., Mencer and Rogers, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr. Judge Kramer did not participate in the decision in this case.

Author: Crumlish

[ 24 Pa. Commw. Page 590]

Ciro's Lounge, Inc. (Appellant) presses but one argument in this appeal from an order of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas which affirmed an order of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (Board) revoking Appellant's liquor license for operating its premises in a disorderly manner. The sole question presented for our determination is whether a finding by the Board of a single act of disorderly conduct on a licensed premises is sufficient to revoke a license of Appellant. There is no factual dispute that the shooting by the proprietor of Appellant of a patron did occur while the proprietor was attempting to remove the boisterous patron following a dispute.

In Petty Liquor License Case, 216 Pa. Superior Ct. 50, 258 A.2d 874 (1969), the Superior Court faced the issue of whether noisy and disorderly conduct, in and of itself, was sufficient to impose a suspension upon a licensee and stated:

[ 24 Pa. Commw. Page 591]

"Section 471 of the Liquor Code, Act of April 12, 1951, P.L. 90, as amended, 47 P.S. 4-471, reads in pertinent part as follows (italics supplied): 'Upon learning of any violation of this act or any laws of this Commonwealth relating to liquor, alcohol or malt or brewed beverages, or of any regulations of the board adopted pursuant to such laws . . . or upon any other sufficient cause shown, the board may . . . cite such licensee to appear before it. . . . Upon such hearing, if satisfied that any such violation has occurred or for other such sufficient cause, the board shall immediately suspend or revoke the license. . . .' The court below reasoned that there is no section in the Liquor Code which specifically relates to the conduct of an establishment 'in a noisy and/or disorderly manner,' nor is there any regulations of the Board in that regard. It is important to note that the court below did not find that the premises were not conducted in a noisy and/or disorderly manner.

"In Reiter Liquor License Case, 173 Pa. Superior Ct. 552, 98 A.2d 465, this Court expressly stated that conducting the licensed premises in a noisy and disorderly manner was one of the conditions which constitute 'other sufficient cause' for which a license may be revoked.

"In Maple Liquor License Case, 207 Pa. Superior Ct. 237, 217 A.2d 859, the Board's order of suspension was based upon four findings of fact, the third of which was that the licensed establishment 'was conducted in a noisy and/or disorderly manner.' We sustained an appeal by the Board from an order of the County Court of Allegheny County reducing the period of suspension.

"In Freedman Liquor License Case, 211 Pa. Superior Ct. 132, 235 A.2d 624, the Board's order of suspension was based on three findings of fact, the first of which ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.