Marquette Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Village of Twin Lakes

Decision Date27 February 1968
Citation38 Wis.2d 310,156 N.W.2d 425
PartiesMARQUETTE SAVINGS & LOAN ASSN., a body corporate, Appellant, v. VILLAGE OF TWIN LAKES, a municipal corporation, Respondent.
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

Morrissy, Morrissy, Sweet & Stowe, Elkhorn, for appellant.

Hammond & Tennessen, Kenosha, for respondent.

CONNOR T. HANSEN, Justice.

The plaintiff urges us to recognize a property and contract right between the licensee and a third party as paramount to the well-established 'privilage' concept that exists between the licensee and the issuing authority. The adoption of such rationale would permit the licensee and a third party to enter into a contract which would negate the discretionary authority of the licensing board in granting and reviewing such licenses. This would be against public policy.

This court has previously held that an agreement between a lessor and the licensee as to a liquor license cannot affect the jurisdiction conferred upon the city council by statute to act upon license transfers. Smith v. City of Whitewater (1947), 251 Wis. 306, 311, 29 N.W.2d 33; Smith v. City of Whitewater (1947), 251 Wis. 313, 29 N.W.2d 37.

The right to hold a liquor license is a privilege that inures to the benefit of the licensee as determined by the exercise of the discretionary authority vested in a licensing board. See State v. Bayne (1898), 100 Wis. 35, 38, 75 N.W. 403. This proposition is advanced in 9 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations, 3rd ed., pp. 508--510, sec. 26.195:

's 26.195.--As right or privilege.

'There is no vested right to or under a liquor license. There is at most a privilege, personal in character, which, it has been said, is merely to do what otherwise would be, or could be made, an offense, and which is subject to changing regulations, and even to legislative cancellation. A liquor license or permit creates neither a contract nor a property right, and denial of it by a proper authority with discretion in the matter deprives an applicant of neither liberty nor property. But it has been asserted that a liquor licensee has something more than a 'mere privilege.' He is protected by law against arbitrary or discriminatory deprivation of the privilege or right, irrespective of what it is called, that he obtains under the license, particularly where he has paid a large sum for it. Although a lawfully issued liquor license may not be property in the strict legal sense, it has some of the aspects of a property right, and it is reasonable to suppose that the legislature intended that a holder of such a license should have protection from arbitrary interference therewith by a local licensing board.'

We see nothing inherently arbitrary and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Hastings Associates, Inc. v. Local 369 Bldg. Fund, Inc.
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • April 3, 1997
    ...41, 63 A.2d 673 (1949). See also Thacher Hotel, Inc. v. Economos, 160 Me. 22, 25, 197 A.2d 59 (1964); Marquette Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Twin Lakes, 38 Wis.2d 310, 315, 156 N.W.2d 425 (1968). But see Denning v. Taber, 70 Cal.App.2d 253, 260, 160 P.2d 900 (1945); Greene v. Brooks, 235 Cal.App.2d......
  • Nowell v. City of Wausau
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • November 6, 2013
    ...After reviewing the parties' briefs on the issue, the circuit court issued an oral ruling. Citing Marquette Savings & Loan Assn. v. Village of Twin Lakes, 38 Wis.2d 310, 156 N.W.2d 425 (1968), the circuit court stated that “when a circuit court has the authority to review the action of a bo......
  • State v. Goulette, S
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • October 29, 1974
    ...subject to review by certiorari. This court has never so restricted the availability of the writ. See Marquette Savings & Loan Asso. v. Twin Lakes (1968), 38 Wis.2d 310, 156 N.W.2d 425. We held there that a common-law writ of certiorari was proper to review the purely discretionary refusal ......
  • Scott v. Village of Kewaskum
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • March 21, 1986
    ...of local governments. E.g., State v. Bayne, 100 Wis. 35, 38, 75 N.W. 403, 404 (1898); Marquette Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Village of Twin Lakes, 38 Wis.2d 310, 315, 156 N.W.2d 425, 427-28 (1968); State ex rel. Ruffalo v. City of Kenosha, 38 Wis.2d 518, 157 N.W.2d 568, 572 (1968). Because ther......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT