1/21/2024 0 Comments Excelsior emc lawsuitLeggett to operate a retail liquor store at 312 South Monroe Street, Albany, Georgia, is hereby rescinded and revoked. 2d 685), another liquor-license case, no supersedeas was granted, and the city commissioners passed a resolution providing that, "In compliance with and obedient to an order of the Superior Court of Dougherty County, Georgia. The Revenue Commissioner in his brief in this court says: "When and if Browning's city license is adjudicated invalid, the State Revenue Commissioner stands ready to be governed by that adjudication." In Haley v. These same counsel, after the supersedeas was denied by this court, now argue that "The issue of enjoining the Revenue Commissioner is now moot and the court should so hold." We do not subscribe to this reasoning. Affirmance of the trial court by this court thereafter could avail defendants in error nothing." This argument was based upon an ordinance of the City of Atlanta, dated February 18, 1959, providing that, unless the holder of a city license began operation of the business within nine months from August 20, 1958, the license would be void, and that, under that ordinance, the defendant Browning had only until May 20, 1959, within which to obtain his State license and begin operation. During the pendency of the bill of exceptions in this court, and before the issuance of any license by the State Revenue Commissioner, counsel for the plaintiffs applied for a supersedeas, and counsel for the defendant Browning, in opposing the grant of a supersedeas, stated in their brief: "The grant of a supersedeas in this case by this court would not preserve this court's jurisdiction, but to the contrary would render the case moot and be a defeat for defendants in error despite the fact that the petition has been held not to state a cause of action. It is insisted by counsel for the defendant Browning that, since the State Revenue Commissioner has now issued a State license to the defendant Browning, this case is now moot. To the judgment sustaining the defendants' general demurrers and dismissing the petition the plaintiffs except. The petition as amended is *264 in six counts, alleging various reasons why the plaintiffs claim the defendant Browning's city liquor license is null and void, and with some of which we will deal specifically in the opinion. McCord, alleging themselves to be citizens, residents, and taxpayers of the City of Atlanta, and members of the Peachtree Road Methodist Church, located in the same vicinity as the proposed liquor store referred to in the petition, brought their petition against Rodney Ingram Browning, as an individual, and Dixon Oxford, as Revenue Commissioner of the State of Georgia, seeking to restrain and enjoin the defendant Browning from operating a retail liquor store at a described location in the City of Atlanta, upon the ground that he had no valid city license to operate such a business, and to restrain and enjoin the defendant State Revenue Commissioner from issuing to the defendant Browning a State liquor license, because, as alleged, he was without authority of law to do so and that to issue such a State license would be an illegal act upon his part because defendant Browning had no valid city license, the existence of which is a condition precedent to the issuance of a valid State liquor license. Bowling, Deputy Assistant Attorneys-General, contra. Johnson, Hatcher, Meyerson & Irvin, Johnson, Hatcher & Meyerson, Herbert Johnson, Eugene Cook, Attorney-General, Ben F. Lozier, for party at interest not party to record.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |