Holcomb v. Gray, s. 29703
| Decision Date | 18 March 1975 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 29703,29704,s. 29703 |
| Citation | 234 Ga. 7,214 S.E.2d 512 |
| Parties | Scherie HOLCOMB et al. v. Jon R. GRAY. Jon R. GRAY v. Scherie HOLCOMB et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
George E. Glaze, Kirby A. Glaze, Jonesboro, for appellants.
Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, John A. Chandler, Charles T. Lester, Jr., James P. Groton, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The primary issue in these appeals is whether the trial court erred in granting plaintiff a writ of mandamus which requires defendants to consider plaintiff's application for a 'liquor by the drink' license for a location in the City of College Park lying within Clayton County. A secondary issue is whether this appeal should be dismissed because it was unreasonable delayed by plaintiff's tardy payment of costs in the trial court.
The appeal will not be dismissed. Defendants made a motion in the trial court to dismiss the appeal and after a hearing it was denied. We affirm the trial court. It is the policy of both appellate courts in Georgia to attempt to avoid dismissing appeals and to try to reach the merits of every case when it can be done consistent with the mandate of the law. E.g., see, Southeastern Plumbing Supply Co. v. Lee, 232 Ga. 626, 208 S.E.2d 449; Brookshire v. J. P. Stevens Co., 133 Ga.App. 97, 210 S.E.2d 46; and, Gilbert v. Reynolds, 233 Ga. 488, 212 S.E.2d 332.
The City of College Park lies in Fulton and Clayton Counties. The sale of liquor by the package was authorized in Fulton County by a special election conducted on March 30, 1938. In 1967, the City of College Park was ordered by the Superior Court of Fulton County to issue licenses for the sale of package liquor in that part of College Park lying within Fulton County. In 1970, the City of College Park held a city-wide referendum, pursuant to Code Ann. § 58-1083, to determine whether the city would issue licenses for the sale of liquor by the drink. The voters of the city in both the Fulton and Clayton areas participated in the election and a majority of the voters approved the issuance of licenses by the city for the sale of liquor by the drink. The city issues licenses for these sales in the Fulton County section of the city, but does not issue such licenses in the Clayton County section of the city since Clayton County is 'dry' as to the sale of liquor by the drink.
All parties concede that the authority to issue licenses for the sale of liquor in package stores is a prerequisite to the authority to license the sale of liquor by the drink. The defendants contend the city does not have authority to issue package store licenses in the Clayton County section of the city, and therefore the city is without authority to issue licenses for the sale of liquor by the drink in the Clayton County part of the city.
It is correct that at one time a municipality could issue licenses for the sale of liquor by the drink only in that part of its territorial limits within a county in which package stores were authorized. See Ga.L.1964, pp. 771-774. This statute specifically stated that the provisions of the 1938 Alcoholic Beverages Statute (Ga.L. 1937-38, Ex.Sess., p. 103) applied to 'any city or municipality in that part...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McClure v. Gower
...to consider any points raised therein, except as may be specifically referred to in [the Act]. OCGA § 5-6-30. See Holcomb v. Gray, 234 Ga. 7, 214 S.E.2d 512 (1975). See also OCGA §§ 5-6-37, 5-6-38, and 5-6-48(b) and And, our state appellate-court operating procedures dictate that whenever a......
-
Brumby v. State
...appeals and to try to reach the merits of every case when it can be done consistent with the mandate of the law," Holcomb v. Gray, 234 Ga. 7, 214 S.E.2d 512 (1975); see also Johnson v. Daniel, 135 Ga.App. 926, 219 S.E.2d 579 (1975). We hold that under the provisions of § 5-6-48, the deficie......
-
Crossroads Bank of Georgia v. Corim, Inc.
...649, 650, 272 S.E.2d 496 (1980)), we cannot endorse a statutory interpretation that renders a statute meaningless. See Holcomb v. Gray, 234 Ga. 7, 9, 214 S.E.2d 512 (1975). The 30-year legislative history of § 11-9-310 evinces a legislative desire to give a timely perfected purchase money s......
-
Johnson v. Daniel
...appeals and to try to reach the merits of every case when it can be done consistent with the mandate of the law.' Holcomb v. Gray, 234 Ga. 7, 214 S.E.2d 512 and cits. The motion to dismiss the appeal is 2. This case arose out of an occurrence in which a 7-year-old child was struck by an aut......