Super Stop Enterprises, Inc. v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Board City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge
Also decided on this docket: La., September 19, 1997 701 So. 2d 145
Super Stop Enterprises, Inc. v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Board City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge, 696 So. 2d 1373 (La. 1997).
Cited by
- In Re: Kristen Nicole Dennis and Jessica Falcon Dennis Applying for Intrafamily Adoption of … La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2024
- Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. v. Madison Annison, Brittany Cates, Wendy Duthu, Jessica Ratelle … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
- Plant-N-Power Services, Inc. v. JRE Field Services, LLC Tex David Simoneaux, Jr., JRE Industrial … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2023
- Donald T. Brown, DDS v. Douglas D. McGinity, McGinity Law Firm, LLC and Hannah … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
- James J. Donelon, Commissioner Of Insurance For The State Of Louisiana, In His Capacity … La. 2020
- Latashia v. Perez, Both Individually and on Behalf of Unborn Child of Travis Chiokai … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
- Yorsch v. Morel 223 So. 3d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
- Navarre Chevrolet, Inc. v. David Begnaud La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
- Navarre Chevrolet, Inc. v. Begnaud 205 So. 3d 973 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
- Pattridge v. Starks 189 So. 3d 1112 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
- Pattridge v. Starks 181 So. 3d 192 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
- R.T. Faulk, III, Corey Farms, L.L.C. Faulk Farms, Incorporated Joanne Hodges River Valley Properties … La. 2015
Opinion text
PER CURIAM * This is an action by Super Stop Enterprises, filed in the district court in East Baton Rouge Parish, appealing the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board’s denial of a Class B beer and liquor license for one of Super Stop’s stores in Baton Rouge. The district court rendered judgment in favor of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board and dismissed Super Stop’s suit. In denying the application, the district judge relied on Baton Rouge Ordinance No. 9839, the Wine, Beer and Liquor Ordinance, and focused on undue traffic congestion in finding sufficient legal grounds to deny the license. The court of appeal reversed and held that the district court had erred in denying the license, reasoning that those opposing the license had presented no evidence to support their concerns of traffic congestion due to increased business. We grant the writ, reverse the court of appeal and reinstate the judgment of the district court. So ordered. LEMMON, J., dissents and assigns reasons. CALOGERO, C.J., dissents for the reasons assigned by LEMMON, J. MARCUS, J., dissents and would deny the writ. Knoll, J., not on panel. See Rule IV, Part 2, § 3.