Matossian

Matossian v. Fahmie

Caution
101 Cal. App. 3d 128·161 Cal. Rptr. 532·1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 1381
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 17, 1980Civ. 44033California3,079 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elkington, J.

The question of this appeal is whether holders of licenses to purvey alcoholic beverages have a right, in combination, to protest the granting, or transfer, of a similar license for the sole purpose of preventing or limiting competition. We conclude they have such a right of protest and affirm the judgment of the superior court. Our reasons follow.

California’s Constitution, article XX, section 22, provides that such purveyors of alcoholic beverages shall be licensed by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (Department). Such a license will be allowed only when not contrary to the “public welfare or morals,...” (Italics added.) Any person aggrieved by action of the Department is given a right of appeal to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board (Appeals Board). And the state’s Legislature is authorized to implement the constitutional provisions to the end that the public welfare and morals be served.

Pursuant to its constitutional authority the Legislature has provided that an application for, or transfer of, a license shall be granted by the Department only if, after “a thorough investigation” (italics added), it is found to be consistent with the public…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.