Grounds for refusing to issue license or for issuing restricted license
Source:
Section 471.313 — Grounds for refusing to issue license or for issuing restricted license, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors471.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Under former similar statute (ORS 472.160)
The commission need not issue all of its statutory quota of licenses to all qualified applicants on a first-come, first-served basis, and could properly consider the “public interest or convenience” in terms of the future, as well as the present. Battle Creek Golf Course v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 21 Or App 179, 534 P2d 204 (1975)
The order refusing an applicant must clearly and precisely state what the commission found to be the facts and why those facts lead it to the decision it makes. Graham v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., (1975) 20 Or App 97, 530 P2d 858; Battle Creek Golf Course v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 21 Or App 179, 534 P2d 204 (1975)
Evidence, inter alia, that applicant stated he would go “under the table” to buy a license demonstrated lack of honesty in dealings with public bodies and was sufficient to show that applicant was not of good moral character. Schmitz v. OLCC, 30 Or App 563, 567 P2d 591 (1977)
Public interest does not include preventing passerby exposure to consumption of alcoholic beverages. Red Robin Enterprises v. OLCC, 55 Or App 720, 639 P2d 710 (1982)
In general
For the purposes of this section, conviction occurs when a party has had judgment entered and the conviction will stand until and unless reversed on appeal. Sportservice Corp. v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 15 Or App 226, 515 P2d 731 (1973), Sup Ct review denied
The language “has reasonable ground to believe” does not require finality of a conviction by exhaustion of appeal. Sportservice Corp. v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 15 Or App 226, 515 P2d 731 (1973), Sup Ct review denied
Provisions allowing refusal of license if sufficient licensed premises are in locality or if license is not demanded by public convenience are not enforceable in absence of agency rule providing statutory terms with greater specificity. Sun Ray Drive-in Dairy, Inc. v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 16 Or App 63, 517 P2d 289 (1973)
The negative context of this section implies that an applicant is entitled to a license so long as certain circumstances set out in the statute or implemental regulations are not shown to be true. Sun Ray Drive-in Dairy, Inc. v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 16 Or App 63, 517 P2d 289 (1973)
Attorney General Opinions
In general
Sanitation inspections by Oregon Liquor Control Commission and Health Division, (1974) Vol 37, p 123
Law Review Citations
In general
53 OLR 465 (1974)