Narrative Opinion Summary
This case involves an appeal by G.G.P. Inc., operating as Thee Doll House Beach, against the Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco's (DABT) decision to revoke its alcoholic beverage license. The revocation was based on the appellant's failure to satisfy the statutory revenue requirement that at least 51% of gross revenue must come from food and non-alcoholic beverage sales, as stipulated under Florida Statutes Section 561.20(2)(a)3. The Division of Administrative Hearings confirmed that the appellant's food sales fell significantly below this threshold. Despite the appellant's efforts to increase food-related revenue through promotions and pricing strategies, the hearing officer noted adverse market conditions but found that the establishment primarily functioned as a restaurant rather than a bar. DABT disagreed with the Hearing Officer's conclusion regarding the appellant's lack of culpability, asserting that culpability is not necessary for revocation under Section 561.29(1). The court upheld DABT's decision, affirming the revocation while allowing the appellant the opportunity to apply for a new license, with DABT having discretionary authority over future licensing decisions. Judges Booth and Zehmer concurred with the decision, recognizing the revocation's severity but noting it does not permanently preclude future license applications.
Legal Issues Addressed
Discretionary Powers of DABT in Licensing Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The DABT retains the discretion to review and decide on the approval of new license applications, taking into account the appellant's past license revocation and conduct.
Reasoning: Appellant is permitted to apply for a new license, with the Department of Alcoholic Beverage and Tobacco (DABT) having discretion in the licensing decision.
Interpretation of Findings of Fact by the Hearing Officersubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that the Hearing Officer's conclusion regarding the appellant's lack of culpability was an interpretation rather than a factual finding, allowing DABT to proceed with revocation.
Reasoning: The appellant contests the final order on two grounds: the rejection of a finding of fact regarding the lack of culpability... However, the Hearing Officer's assertion was deemed an interpretation rather than a factual finding, and culpability is not necessary for a license revocation.
License Revocation under Florida Statutes Section 561.29(1)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed the revocation of the appellant's alcoholic beverage license due to failure to meet the statutory revenue requirement for food and non-alcoholic beverage sales.
Reasoning: DABT cited facts showing that the appellant did not meet the criteria outlined in Section 561.20(2)(a)3, justifying the revocation of the license under 561.29(1).
Revenue Requirement for Special Restaurant Beverage Licensessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's failure to maintain the required 51% revenue from food and non-alcoholic beverages led to the revocation of its license, confirming the necessity of meeting the statutory revenue threshold.
Reasoning: The license, issued under Florida Statutes Section 561.20(2)(a)3, requires the establishment to be a restaurant with a minimum of 2,500 square feet, serving 150 full-course meals, and deriving at least 51% of gross revenue from food and non-alcoholic beverage sales.