134 Fla. 212 | Fla. | 1938
"No license under sub-sections III, IV, V, VI, VII, VII 1/2 of this Section shall be granted to a vendor whose place of business is or shall be within 2,500 feet of an established school or church except in incorporated cities and towns, which said incorporated cities and towns are hereby given the power hereafter to establish zoning ordinances restricting the location wherein such licensees may be permitted to conduct such place of business and no license shall be granted to any such licensee to conduct a place of business in a location where such place of business is prohibited from being operated by such municipal ordinance."
The pertinent portion of Ordinance No. 1288 is Section 17, viz.:
"Section 17. That no liquor shall be sold within 300 *214 feet of any church or school; however, this provision shall not apply to a Package Store or to those now engaged in the business of selling liquor, wines and beers, and licensed under the Ordinance of the City of Miami."
The power of the Legislature under Section 8 of Article
It is next contented that the Turf Exchange Bar, Inc., Walgreen Drug Stores Co., and Hippodrome Cigar Stores, Inc., each having obtained a license to sell liquors, were and are necessary parties in the suit at bar. If the licensees here had a vested right created by the said license, then it may well be contended that each firm would be a necessary party, but the license privilege granted being a governmental power, it can at the discretion of the Legislature be withdrawn. See State v. Burgoyne, 7 Lea 173 (Tenn.) 40 Am. Rep. 60; Boston Beer Co. v. Massachusetts,
Counsel argues that persons materially interested, either legally or beneficially, in the subject matter of a suit must *215
be made parties defendant or parties complainant so that a complete decree may be made binding upon all the parties, and cites State, ex rel. Long, v. Carey,
Due consideration has been given by this Court to each contention urged as a basis for a rehearing and have concluded that the petition for rehearing should be denied.
It is so ordered.
WHITFIELD, TERRELL, BROWN, BUFORD and CHAPMAN, J.J., concur.