Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in the case of In Re: Matter of Revocation of Restaurant Liquor License No. R-6703 and Sunday Sale Permit No. SS-67, Duquesne Pub, Inc., Sandroni's Pub v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, No. SA 117 of 1981.
Gary F. DiVito, Assistant Counsel, with him J. Leonard Langan, Chief Counsel, for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.
Judges Rogers, Craig and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Rogers.
[ 75 Pa. Commw. Page 571]
The Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (board) has appealed from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County setting aside an order of the board imposing a fifteen-day suspension of the restaurant license of Duquesne Pub, Inc. and substituting therefor a five hundred dollar fine. The license was suspended after hearing by the board for the following reasons:
1. The licensee, by its servants, agents or employes permitted minors to frequent the licensed premises, during the month of July, [and] on August 1, 4, 6, 10, 14, 1980.
2. The licensee, by its servants, agents or employes sold, furnished and/or gave or permitted such sale, furnishing and/or giving of liquor and/or malt or brewed beverages to minors, during the month of July, [and] on August 1, 4, 6, 10, 14, 1980.
and because the board also found that the instant violation was the licensee's third violation of the Liquor Code (Act of April 12, 1951, P.L. 90, as amended, 47 P.S. §§ 1-101 -- 9-902) within a period of four years and
[ 75 Pa. Commw. Page 572]
that this warranted suspension or revocation pursuant to Section 471 of the Liquor Code, 47 P.S. § 4-471 which provides in part that:
If the violation in question is a third or subsequent violation of this act or the act of June 24, 1939 (P.L. 872), known as "The Penal Code," occuring within a period of four years the board shall impose a suspension or revocation. (Emphasis added.)
At a hearing conducted before the board, documentary evidence, including citations previously issued by the board, was admitted and was found by the board to establish that the licensee had unlawfully conducted a lottery on the licensed premises, in 1979 had permitted gambling on the licensed premises and had furnished liquor for consumption off the licensed premises in 1978; had permitted minors to frequent the licensed premises and had furnished liquor or beer to minors in March, 1979; had furnished liquor or beer to minors in February and May, 1978 and had falsified its restaurant liquor license application in March, 1978; and had engaged in conduct prohibited by the Liquor Code in 1975, a date without the four-year statutory period. The licensee does not now contend that these violations did not occur or that the documentary evidence is inaccurate. Therefore, it is ...