Schieffelin & Cоmpany, a New York corporation, is a licensed producer of distilled spirits and an importer of wines. Prior to 1981, it distributed distilled spirits and wine in Georgia through five designated wholesalers. Pursuant to applicable rules, on July 2, 1981, Schieffelin filed with the Revenue Commissioner, W. E. Strickland, its Notice of Intention to Change Designated Wholesalers whereby it would thereаfter do business in Georgia through one of its designated wholesalers. The other four wholesalers objected. After hеarings in January and February 1982, the Commissioner denied Schieffelin’s proposed reduction of wholesalers by order еntered July 21, 1982.
On August 19, 1982, Schieffelin filed in the Superior Court of
Schieffelin appealed directly to this court within 30 days under OCGA § 5-6-34, without filing an application to appeal under OCGA § 5-6-35. Relying on this omission, the wholesalers and the Commissioner filеd a motion to dismiss the appeal in this court.
In 1975, in Blackmon v. Alexander,
During the 1981 session, the effective date of this amendment to the APA was delayed until July 1, 1982. Ga. L. 1981, p. 1269 at 1305. But before that date the legislature, in its 1982 session, again amended the APA. In Section 6 of the 1982 Act, the APA was changed by adding as an exception to its provisions “the Department of Revenue when conducting hearings on the denial, suspension or cancellation of licenses relating to alcoholic beverages . . . .” Ga. L. 1982, p. 1463 at 1468-69. In Section 7 of the 1982 Act, the 1980 amendment was repealed. Ga. L. 1982, p. 1463 at 1469-70. These amendments became effective April 16, 1982. Ga. L. 1982, p. 1463 at 1476. Section 6 was carried forward into § 50-13-2 of the Official Cоde
Schieffelin’s administrative petition was filed with the Commissioner on July 2, 1981, while the regulаtion of liquor and alcoholic beverages was exempt from the APA. The Revenue Commissioner’s order was entеred on July 21, 1982, at which time the APA included the regulation of liquor and alcoholic beverages except Revenue Department hearings on the denial, suspension or cancellation of licenses relating to alcohоlic beverages. Similarly, the 1982 amendment was in effect when Schieffelin sought review of the Commissioner’s order in Pulton Supеrior Court.
The matter before the Revenue Commissioner (termination of four of Schieffelin’s wholesalers) was a “сontested case” within the meaning of the APA, OCGA § 50-13-2 (2), and did not involve the suspension or cancellation of licenses. Thus, the trial court was correct in treating review of the Commissioner’s order as a petition for judicial review pursuаnt to the APA. OCGA § 50-13-19.
Appeals from decisions of the superior courts reviewing decisions of state administrative agencies, including decisions of the Revenue Commissioner (except cases involving ad valorem taxes), require an аpplication to appeal made pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-35. Wheeler v. Strickland,
Citing OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (4), Schieffelin argues that it has the right of direct appeal to this court because it was denied injunctive relief by the superiоr court. Schieffelin was not entitled to maintain its suit for injunctive relief because Schieffelin had an adequate remedy at law, to wit: judicial review pursuant to OCGA § 50-13-19, supra. The holding of Blackmon v. Alexander, supra, is inapplicable where an adequate means of review of the Commissioner’s decisions is prescribed by law.
There having been no application to appeal as required by OCGA § 5-6-35, the motion to dismiss made by the wholesalers and the Commissioner is granted.
Appeal dismissed.