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.

COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA v. GARY LEE DOBRINOFF AND MICHAEL R. DOBRINOFF (02/27/84)

decided: February 27, 1984.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD, APPELLANT
v.
GARY LEE DOBRINOFF AND MICHAEL R. DOBRINOFF, T/A FLINTLOCK INN, APPELLEES



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County in the case of Gary Lee Dobrinoff and Michael K. Dobrinoff v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Liquor Control Board, No. 7 M.D. 1983.

COUNSEL

Felix Thau, Assistant Counsel, with him Gary F. DiVito, Chief Counsel, for appellant.

Barry J. Peffley, for appellees.

Cecilia Macri, Assistant General Counsel, for Amicus Curiae, Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission.

Judges Rogers, Craig and Colins, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 80 Pa. Commw. Page 454]

The Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board has appealed from the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County which, after receiving additional evidence in a court hearing, vacated a ten-day suspension which the

[ 80 Pa. Commw. Page 455]

    board had issued against the Flintlock Inn, a bar owned and operated by appellees, the Dobrinoffs. The court's order also stated that it reversed the "Liquor Control Board's finding."

The elements of the statutory framework for the suspension were threefold, as follows:

1. Sex Discrimination : The bar, as a "place of public accommodation, resort or amusement," discriminated on the basis of sex, contrary to the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, 43 P.S. § 955(i)(1) -- a violation of any Pennsylvania law being a basis for suspension under section 471 of the Liquor Code, Act of April 12, 1951, P.L. 90, as amended, 47 P.S. § 4-471;

2. Food Service Failure : The bar breached the requirement that, to hold a restaurant liquor license, licensee shall conduct a "restaurant," meaning a reputable "place . . . habitually and principally used for the purpose of providing food for the public. . . ." Sections 102, 404 of the Liquor Code, 47 P.S. §§ 1-102, 1-104; and

3. Tap Mislabeling : The bar violated the prohibition against a licensee serving "malt or brewed beverages from any faucet, spigot or other dispensing apparatus, unless the trade name or brand of the product shall appear . . . upon such faucet, spigot or ...


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.