174 Pa. Super. 457 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1953
Opinion by
On April 1, 1949 Frank Rizzo applied to the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board for a hotel liquor license and amusement permit for premises located in Springhill Township, Fayette County. After a hearing the Board filed an opinion and order refusing the
George Rizzo, brother of appellant, and other members of his family, operated a licensed restaurants known as “The Wagon Wheel” in the village of Lake Lynn, Springhill Township, Fayette County, and employed Frank Rizzo, appellant, as a bartender until the establishment was sold late in 1945 or early in 1946. Approximately three years thereafter, George and Elizabeth Rizzo purchased an old homestead in the said village of Lake Lynn, which had formerly been operated as a boarding house. After some remodeling, an application for a hotel liquor license and amusement permit for the premises was filed by George and Elizabeth Rizzo. The order of the Liquor Control Board refusing this application was sustained by the Court of Quarter Sessions of Fayette County. Shortly thereafter George and Elizabeth Rizzo sold the equipment and fixtures of the remodeled boarding house to Frank Rizzo. The premises for which the license is applied was purchased by appellant from his father and mother. After making minor repairs the application in question was filed with the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board.
The opinion filed by the Board refusing the license is in part as follows: “On August 3, 1949, a hearing upon said application was held after notice to the applicant as required by law. At the said hearing, which was attended by the applicant and his counsel the evidence adduced established the following facts: 1. It
The Liquor Code Of April 12, 1951, P. L. 90, §464, 47 P.S. §4-464, provides for an appeal to this Court from an order or decree sustaining the action of the Board in refusing to issue a license. On such appeal the examination by the appéllate court of the record goes beyond thé question of the’regularity of the proceedings and includes a review of the proofs to determine whether thé Board abused its discretion in refusing the license. William E. Burrell I.B.P.O.E. of W. 737, Liquor License Case, 172 Pa. Superior Ct. 346, 94 A. 2d 110. See Zermani Liquor License Case, 173 Pa. Superior Ct. 428, 98 A. 2d 645.
The principal and most substantial ground on which the Board based its refusal is the finding that appellant was not a person of good repute as a law abiding citizen.
Section 404 of the Liquor Code, 47 P.S. §4-404, governing the issuance of hotel, restaurant and club liquor licenses provides that “Upon receipt of the ap
In the instant case there is ample credible testimony to support the finding of the Board that the appellant was not a responsible person of good reputation. A protest was filed with the Board against the issuance of this license and witnesses were heard at the hearing by the Board as well as by the court. The witnesses who testified in support of the protest were all residents of Lake Lynn for many years and were all familiar with “The Wagon Wheel” where appellant worked as a bartender before he purchased the premises for which he now seeks a license. They had known appellant for many years and were familiar with his activities while he worked at “The Wagon Wheel”. Their testimony reveals a pattern of regular conduct at this tavern which included gambling, serving beer on Sundays, permitting intoxicated persons on the premises, and frequent fighting among the patrons. Several witnesses testified that appellant served them beer on Sundays and that he participated in the gambling activities. All testified that the general reputation of “The Wagon Wheel” was notoriously bad during the time appellant worked there as a bartender and that his reputation was very poor. Some of the
Order affirmed at appellant’s costs.