G & B OF JACKSONVILLE, INC., D/B/A THE HAREM, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION, DIVISION OF BEVERAGE, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A licensee is responsible for its employees' violations of law occurring on the licensed premises, even if the licensee claims ignorance.
Two employees of a bar engaged in open and gross lewd acts with patrons on the licensed premises on the same day. The Division of Beverage suspended t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Competent Substantial Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Acting Chief Judge.
G & B seeks review of an order of the Division of Beverage finding that two of G & B’s agents, servants or employees violated Section 798.02, Florida Statutes (1977), thereby violating Section 561.29, Florida Statutes (1977), and suspending G & B’s liquor license for ten days. We affirm.
Section 798.02 provides that a person who engages in open and gross lewdness and lascivious behavior shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree.
Section 561.29 gives the Division authority to suspend a beverage license when the Division finds upon sufficient cause that a licensee or its agents, officers, servants or employees, on the licensed premises, while in the scope of employment, has violated any law of this State.
We do not deem it necessary to recite the charges and findings of the Division. Suffice it to say that the charges were sufficient under Section 798.02 and the findings were supported by competent substantial evidence.
In this particular case, two agents, servants or employees engaged in similar but separate open and gross lewd acts with different patrons on the licensed premises on the same day. The persistent and practiced manner in which the violations were executed lead to the conclusion that G & B either cordoned or negligently overlooked the illegal activities. A licensee may not remove itself from responsibility by not being present on the premises or by claiming ignorance of the repeated violations. Pauline v. Lee, 147 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962).
The other issues presented by G & B have been considered but are without merit.
The order appealed is affirmed.
SMITH, J., and MITCHELL, Henry Clay, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bach v. Fla. State Bd. OF Dentistry, 378 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)…ich it did not — disclosing that he ordered Mrs. Bach to perform a prohibited act. The Board responds to Dr. Bach’s arguments by relying upon certain cases construing the beverage licensing laws, e. g., G. & B. of Jacksonville, Inc. v. State, etc., 371 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) and Pauline v. Lee, 147 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962), which hold that the state beverage director correctly revoked certain beverage licenses because the licensees’ employees had persistently and repeatedly violated the law, [*3…
-
Jones v. State, 448 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…verage law, the hearing officer cited Golden Dolphin No. 2, Inc. v. State, Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco, 403 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), G & B of Jacksonville, Inc. v. State, Department of Business Regulation, Division of Beverage, 371 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), and Pauline v. Lee, 147 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962), cert. denied, 156 So. 2d 389 (Fla.1963). Section 561.29(1)(a), which the licensee is charged as having violated, provides: Violation by.the licensee or his or its agents, o…
-
Simmons v. Dep't of Bus. Reg., 465 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…. See, e.g., Pauline v. Lee, supra (5 violations over a 3-day period); Lash, Inc. v. Department of Business Regulation, 411 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (5 violations within 1 week); G & B of Jacksonville, Inc. v. Department of Business Regulation, 371 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (3 violations in 1 day); Golden Dolphin No. 2, Inc. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco, 403 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (violations on “several” occasions). In the instant case, we find there was competent substant…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pauline v. LEE, 147 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)