00-0143
Summary Information Not Available
Cite as La. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 00-0143
May 9, 2000
OPINION NUMBER 00-143
Honorable Charles I. Hudson
State Representative District 40
1109 West Vine Street
Opelousas, Louisiana 70570
Dear Representative Hudson:
This office is in receipt of your opinion request directed to Attorney General
Richard P. Ieyoub. The request has been assigned to me for research and
resolution.
You ask in your request whether or not a business establishment that was in
operation on one Lot identified as Lot "A", but was moved to a new location on
Lot "B" may be considered the same business, when the two locations have
different municipal addresses and the new business is more inclusive of services
such as foods, etc. You have further attached to your request a survey plat of
the Lots as well as a copy of Ordinance No. 5 of 1989 passed by the Town of
Washington regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages. From the attachments I
presumed that the business establishment questioned is in the business of
selling alcoholic beverages.
In answer to your question we must first look to statutory provisions which address
this issue. LSA-R.S. 26:81 provides:
A.
No permit shall be granted under this Chapter in
contravention of any municipal or parish ordinances adopted
pursuant to the zoning laws of the state.
B.
(1)
No permit shall be issued by the commissioner or by
any municipality or parish to authorize any business in any
subdivision of the state where the business has been
prohibited by referendum vote.
(2)
In any subdivision where saloons are prohibited, but
package sales of liquor are permitted, Class B package
liquor permits may be issued in combination with Class A
retail beer permits.
(3)
Any premises licensed to deal in alcoholic beverages,
upon proper application, shall be issued a permit for
beverages of low alcoholic content as defined in R.S.
55 - -
INTOXICATING LIQUORS - -Local Option
55 - B - -INTOXICATING LIQUORS - -Permits, Licenses, & Fees
55 - C - -INTOXICATING LIQUORS- -Power to Control & Validity of
Regulation
La. R.S. 26:81
Moving business establishment from one location to another voids
exemption for distance requirements provided by local ordinance and
La. R.S. 26:81.
Honorable Charles I. Hudson
OPINION NUMBER 00-143
Page - 2 -
26:241. The new permit shall be of the same class as the
one for which the premises has a license.
C.
When prohibited by municipal or parish ordinance, no permit
shall be granted for any premises situated within three
hundred feet or less, as fixed by the ordinance, of a public
playground or of a building used exclusively as a church or
synagogue, public library, or school. In municipalities and in
unincorporated areas which are divided into subdivisions
with streets, blocks, and sidewalks, this distance shall be
measured as a person walks using the sidewalk from the
nearest point of the property line of the church, synagogue,
public library, public playground, or school to the nearest
point of the premises to be licensed.
D.
Outside of municipalities and unincorporated areas which
are not divided into subdivisions with streets, blocks, or
sidewalks, parish ordinances may extend the prohibition to a
distance of five hundred feet of the church, synagogue,
public library, school or playground. The measurement of
this distance shall be made in the same manner as the
measurement is made in municipalities.
E.
The prohibitions in this Section do not apply to any premises
which are maintained as a bona fide hotel, or fraternal
organizations, nor to any premises which have been
licensed to deal in alcoholic beverages for a period of one
year or longer prior to the adoption of the ordinance.
F.
For the purposes of this Section, "public library" shall mean a
public library, which is located in a permanent structure and
is open to the public for three or more days per week.
Amended by acts 1995, No. 1076, § 1, eff. June 29, 1995;
Acts 1999, No. 1010, § 1.
Also of significance is § 3 of Ordinance No. 5 of 1989 of the Town of Washington,
which provides:
"All business establishments that are presently located in the Town
of Washington and are operating with a valid license for the year of
1989 are hereby exempted from the conditions and provisions of
this ordinance. Should said business establishment, that is outlined
in this section, cease operation for a period of 30 days or more,
than this business establishment will also be covered by the terms
and conditions of this ordinance, and cannot reopen for business
unless said establishment is more than five hundred feet from a
residence, school or church as set forth in the terms of this
ordinance. Said five hundred feet is to be measured from the
actual business establishment to the said residence, and, the land
Honorable Charles I. Hudson
OPINION NUMBER 00-143
Page - 3 -
boundaries are not to be used in calculating the distance from the
said business establishment to the said residence."
While the information provided in the request deals only with business
establishments on different Lots, it is the opinion of this office that such a
business establishment, if selling alcoholic beverages, no longer falls within the
exemptions provided by R.S. 26:81(E) or § 3 of Ordinance No. 5 of 1989 of the
Town of Washington. La. R.S. 26:81 deals with premises location as does § 3 of
Ordinance No. 5. Since the business establishment changed locations and
municipal addresses, the exemptions provided no longer apply to the new
business establishment.
In Rev. Lawyer Fields et al v. Phillip Re Bowe, d/b/a Sungold Inn.,84 So. 2d 727,
writ denied (La. App. 1st Cir. 1956), The First Circuit Court of Appeal addressed
the same issue and stated:
The facts are clear that defendant's vendor, one Joe Zito, in 1947
operated a grocery and barroom business in the "Michelli Building"
located at 8480 Baker Road. He then bought the Lot to the rear of
his place of business facing on Soro Street and sometime in 1948
placed a building thereon and moved his liquor business therein in
1949. In 1949 he sold the business to Rebowe, the defendant
herein.
The original "Michelli Building" in which he operated was
approximately 380 feet as measured under the provisions of the Act
from the church in question. However, the new building which he
placed to the rear of the "Michelli Building" was approximately 201
feet from the church.
When Zito moved his liquor business into the new building in either
1948 or 1949 prior to selling it to Rebowe, it became a new
business and it, therefore, was not in operation for a period of one
year or longer prior to the passage of the 1948 or 1919 Ordinance,
and was not protected by the provisions of the law which counsel
for appellant complains this court failed to consider. Had Zito
operated the business in the new building for a period of one year
or longer prior to the passage of the Ordinance of 1948 appellant's
contention might be sound. Zito was not entitled to a license under
the law for the business which he opened in the new building in
1948 or 1949 and the issuance of a license each succeeding year
thereafter was contrary to the law.
In conclusion, the business establishment you described in your letter should be
considered a new business establishment in connection with the provisions of
Honorable Charles I. Hudson
OPINION NUMBER 00-143
Page - 4 -
Ordinance No. 5 of 1989 of the Town of Washington and a new separate
premises under the provisions of La. R.S. 26:81. I trust that the foregoing has
adequately answered your inquiries. Please do not hesitate to contact our office
if we can be of further assistance.
Yours very truly,
RICHARD P. IEYOUB
ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY:
_________________________
CHARLES H. BRAUD, JR.
Assistant Attorney General
RPI:CHB,JR/mjb
Honorable Charles I. Hudson
OPINION NUMBER 00-143
Page - 5 -
Syllabus
55 - - INTOXICATING LIQUORS - -Local Option
55 - B - -INTOXICATING LIQUORS - -Permits, Licenses, & Fees
55 - C - -INTOXICATING LIQUORS- -Power to Control & Validity of Regulation
La. R.S. 26:81
Moving business establishment from one location to another voids exemption for
distance requirements provided by local ordinance and La. R.S. 26:81.
Date Received:
Date Released: May 9, 2000
Honorable Charles I. Hudson
State Representative District 40
1109 West Vine Street
Opelousas, Louisiana 70570
CHARLES H. BRAUD, JR.
Assistant Attorney General