Twenty-First Amendment

113 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• N. Fla. Women's Health & Counseling Servs., Inc. v. State
  866 So. 2d 612· Fla.· 2003-07-10 ·cited 148×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Florida's Parental Notice of Abortion Act unconstitutionally infringes on a minor's right of privacy under the Florida Constitution. The Court applied its controlling precedent from In re T.W. and found that the Act imposes a significant restri
• Reed v. Vill. OF Shorewood
  704 F.2d 943· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-05 ·cited 142×
  A liquor license can be considered property for Fourteenth Amendment due process purposes, and the Twenty-First Amendment does not grant absolute immunity to states to restrict First Amendment expression in bars without justification. Local officials acting in judicial or legisla
• Mrs. Lola Hornsby v. Allen
  326 F.2d 605· 5th Cir.· 1964-01-07 ·cited 139×
  The court's opinion, as interpreted by the dissenter, classifies the refusal of a liquor license as adjudicative, not legislative, potentially misleading future cases.
• City OF Daytona Beach v. Del Percio
  476 So. 2d 197· Fla.· 1985-08-30 ·cited 110×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a Daytona Beach ordinance prohibiting exposure of the female breast below the areola in establishments serving alcohol, reversing the Fifth District Court of Appeal's invalidation of the ordinance on vagueness and overbreadth grounds. The Court he
• United States v. Ianniello
  808 F.2d 184· 2d Cir.· 1986-12-04 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the "pattern requirement" for RICO does not necessitate multiple schemes, and that federal mail fraud prosecutions are permissible even when conduct also violates state liquor laws.
• Gaitan v. United States
  317 F.2d 494· 10th Cir.· 1963-04-22 ·cited 54×
  A change in constitutional interpretation does not require retroactive application to invalidate antecedent final judgments, as due process is determined by the law existing at the time of the judicial decision.
• Grand Faloon Tavern, Inc. v. Wicker
  670 F.2d 943· 11th Cir.· 1982-03-15 ·cited 52×
  A municipal ordinance prohibiting nude and semi-nude entertainment in establishments selling alcohol is a valid exercise of police power and does not facially violate the First Amendment.
• Krueger v. City OF Pensacola
  759 F.2d 851· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-06 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the city ordinance prohibiting topless dancing in establishments serving alcohol was unconstitutional under the First Amendment because the city failed to demonstrate a legitimate government interest that motivated its passage.
• United States v. Gill
  490 F.2d 233· 7th Cir.· 1973-12-28 ·cited 40×
  The court affirmed convictions for extortion and perjury, finding that the Hobbs Act's interstate commerce requirement was met, the evidence supported extortion over bribery, joinder of counts was proper, and jury instructions were not prejudicial.
• Scott v. Vill. OF Kewaskum & Vill. Bd. of Kewaskum
  786 F.2d 338· 7th Cir.· 1986-03-21 ·cited 39×
  A liquor license is not a property interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, and operating a tavern is not a common occupation that implicates a liberty interest requiring a statement of reasons for denial.
• Vance D. Krause v. Sacramento INN
  479 F.2d 988· 9th Cir.· 1973-05-10 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the California Supreme Court's invalidation of the statute mooted the need for a three-judge court and vacated the district court's judgment on that issue.
• Int'l Food & Bev. Sys. v. City OF Fort Lauderdale
  794 F.2d 1520· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-25 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the district court erred in enjoining the city's ordinances based on a misapplication of First Amendment law, particularly regarding site availability and the presumption of legislative intent.
• United Bev. Co. OF S. Bend, Inc. v. Ind. Alcoholic Bev. Comm'n
  760 F.2d 155· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-22 ·cited 37×
  There is no independent federal constitutional doctrine of excessive delegation of state legislative power, and state law claims should be dismissed for lack of federal jurisdiction when the federal claim is dismissed.
• Dowling Bros. Distilling Co. v. United States
  153 F.2d 353· 6th Cir.· 1946-02-08 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the order denying a stay of proceedings was not immediately appealable, and that the defendants' failure to file a timely protest with the Administrator, their constitutional arguments, and their claims of ignorance did not constitute good faith or a reasonabl
• Dunagin v. The City OF Oxford
  718 F.2d 738· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-31 ·cited 30×
• United States v. Tax Comm'n of Miss.
  W.D. Pa.· 1975-06-02 ·cited 30×
  Mississippi's Regulation 25, requiring out-of-state distillers to collect a wholesale markup on liquor sold to military installations, imposes an unconstitutional state tax on federal instrumentalities.
• Felix v. Coleman A. Young
  536 F.2d 1126· 6th Cir.· 1976-06-17 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the challenged ordinance is facially unconstitutional because it is overbroad and fails to specifically define the sexual conduct it seeks to regulate.
• Adolph Coors Co. v. A & S Wholesalers, Inc.
  561 F.2d 807· 10th Cir.· 1977-07-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Continental T.V. v. GTE Sylvania, which overruled the Schwinn per se rule, applies retroactively and requires a rule of reason analysis for vertical territorial restrictions. The court also remanded the issue of damages from the
• United States Brewers Ass'n, Inc. v. Healy
  692 F.2d 275· 2d Cir.· 1982-11-01 ·cited 23×
  The court held that Connecticut's beer price affirmation statute, by requiring brewers to set minimum prices for sales in bordering states, impermissibly burdens interstate commerce and violates the Commerce Clause.
• Belk-James, Inc. v. Nuzum
  358 So. 2d 174· Fla.· 1978-03-09 ·cited 23×
  Belk-James, a beer distributor, challenged the constitutionality of a Florida statute requiring all malt beverage containers sold in Florida to bear a "Florida" designation approved by the state, arguing it violated due process. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the statute as a r
• Salem INN, Inc. v. Frank
  522 F.2d 1045· 2d Cir.· 1975-08-28 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the town's ordinance banning topless dancing in certain establishments was unconstitutionally overbroad and violated the Equal Protection Clause.
• Miller v. Civil City OF S. Bend
  904 F.2d 1081· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that nude dancing, even in a bar setting, is constitutionally protected expressive conduct under the First Amendment.
• Ivey v. Bacardi Imports
  541 So. 2d 1129· Fla.· 1989-03-23 ·cited 16×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a trial court decision striking down Florida's 1988 alcoholic beverage import tax scheme as unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause. The Court held that although the Twenty-first Amendment grants states broad power to regulate alcoholic bever
• Philly's v. Byrne
  732 F.2d 87· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the local option provision is a valid legislative enactment, not an unconstitutional delegation of authority, and does not violate due process.
• Okla. Telecasters Ass'n v. Crisp
  699 F.2d 490· 10th Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's summary dismissal of a similar case (Queensgate) for want of a substantial federal question is binding on this court, and therefore, Oklahoma's laws prohibiting alcoholic beverage advertising do not violate the First Amendment.
• Nat'l Distrib. Co., Inc. v. United States Treas. Dep't
  626 F.2d 997· D.C. Cir.· 1980-04-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Federal Alcohol Administration Act's 'tied house' provision does not prohibit nondiscriminatory, unconditional sales of wine by a wholesaler to retailers at a price substantially below cost.
• Women's Liberation Union OF R.I. v. Israel
  512 F.2d 106· 1st Cir.· 1975-03-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a Rhode Island law prohibiting Class C liquor establishments from serving beverages to women violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Wash. Brewers Inst. v. United States
  137 F.2d 964· 9th Cir.· 1943-08-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Twenty-First Amendment does not preclude federal jurisdiction over interstate commerce in intoxicants, and the Sherman Act applies to price-fixing conspiracies by brewers, even if states regulate liquor traffic.
• Iacobucci v. City OF Newport
  785 F.2d 1354· 6th Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the fingerprinting ordinance is constitutional as a valid exercise of police power, but the nude dancing ordinance requires further factual determination regarding the city's authority.
• del Percio v. The City OF Daytona Beach
  449 So. 2d 323· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-03-29 ·cited 13×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed convictions under a Daytona Beach ordinance prohibiting exposure of female breasts below the areola in establishments serving alcohol, finding the ordinance unconstitutionally vague and overbroad because lower courts had interpreted i
• Stein Distrib. Co., Inc. v. Dep't OF the Treas. Bureau OF Alcohol
  779 F.2d 1407· 9th Cir.· 1986-01-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the wholesaler's conduct, which involved rearranging competitor products to depress their sales, violated the federal tied house provision, and this federal interest prevailed over the less substantial state interest in allowing such activities.
• Lamar Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Miss. State TAX Comm'n
  701 F.2d 314· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-11 ·cited 12×
  Mississippi's near-total ban on liquor advertising by intrastate media is an unconstitutional abridgment of commercial speech rights, as the advertising does not propose an illegal transaction and the ban is not narrowly tailored to address misleading information or promote illeg
• Miller v. Or. Liquor Control Comm'n
  688 F.2d 1222· 9th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Oregon's regulatory scheme for beer and wine pricing, which allows private parties to set prices and lacks active state supervision, does not qualify for the state action exemption from federal antitrust laws.
• Rehner v. Baxter Rice
  678 F.2d 1340· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-08 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority's decision is inconsistent with the relevant law and legislative history regarding liquor sales on Indian reservations.
• Hanf v. United States
  235 F.2d 710· 8th Cir.· 1956-07-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged offenses, the motions to dismiss were untimely, and the Federal Alcohol Administration Act constitutionally applies to intrastate liquor sales that affect interstate commerce or revenue.
• Geaneas v. Willets
  911 F.2d 579· 11th Cir.· 1990-09-10 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the Daytona Beach ordinance regulating nudity in establishments serving alcohol is a valid exercise of the city's powers under the Twenty-first Amendment and that the plaintiffs' claims of overbreadth, vagueness, and selective enforcement lack merit.
• Fillingim v. State
  446 So. 2d 1099· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-02-08 ·cited 11×
  Petitioners challenged the constitutionality of Leon County Ordinance No. 82-32, which prohibits nude or semi-nude entertainment in establishments where alcoholic beverages are sold. The Florida District Court of Appeal upheld the ordinance as a valid exercise of the county's pol
• Jorgenson v. Cnty. OF Volusia
  846 F.2d 1350· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the attorneys' failure to cite adverse, controlling precedent in a memorandum supporting an application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction warranted the imposition of Rule 11 sanctions.
• Actmedia, Inc. v. Stroh
  830 F.2d 957· 9th Cir.· 1986-05-12 ·cited 10×
  The Eleventh Amendment bars Actmedia's claims against the ABC and its director based on state law, and the statute at issue does not violate the First Amendment's commercial speech protections.
• Dakota Wholesale Liquor, Inc. v. State OF Minn.
  584 F.2d 847· 8th Cir.· 1978-09-29 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding no abuse of discretion by the district court.
• Johnson v. Yellow Cab Transit Co.
  137 F.2d 274· 10th Cir.· 1943-07-26 ·cited 10×
  A state cannot prohibit the interstate transportation of intoxicating liquor through its territory, even if destined for a point within the state where its sale or possession is illegal.
• United States v. Glidden Co.
  119 F.2d 235· 6th Cir.· 1941-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the face amounts of the bonds constituted liquidated damages, not penalties, and that the prior civil and criminal actions did not bar the present suit for recovery on the bonds.
• In re Kimura v. Battley
  969 F.2d 806· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-10 ·cited 8×
  A federal tax lien attaches to the proceeds of an Alaska liquor license, and state law cannot grant priority to trade creditors over a properly filed federal tax lien.
• S. Ent. Co. v. City of Boynton Beach
  736 F. Supp. 1094· S.D. Fla.· 1990-04-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the ordinance was void because the city failed to comply with state statutory notice requirements for its enactment, despite the ordinance otherwise being a valid time, place, and manner regulation under the First Amendment.
• Crowley Bev. Co., Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co.
  862 F.2d 688· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict for wrongful termination and the denial of the constitutional challenge, finding sufficient evidence supported the jury's conclusion that the brewer lacked good cause and that the statute was constitutional.
• Nat'l Distrib. Co., Inc. v. Off. OF the Comptroller
  523 So. 2d 156· Fla.· 1988-04-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the District Court's findings of liability and remedy failed to comport with Supreme Court precedent regarding Eighth Amendment challenges to prison conditions.
• Battipaglia v. NEW York State Liquor Auth.
  745 F.2d 166· 2d Cir.· 1984-09-21 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge holds that the New York legislation mandating adherence to announced prices constitutes a per se violation of the Sherman Act and fails the Midcal test for state action immunity.
• United States v. The State OF Tex.
  695 F.2d 136· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Twenty-first Amendment does not grant Texas jurisdiction to regulate the sale or distribution of alcoholic beverages on federal enclaves within the state.
• Grendel's DEN, Inc. v. Goodwin
  662 F.2d 88· 1st Cir.· 1981-04-07 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge believes the statute unconstitutionally confers governmental power on religious institutions, violating the Establishment Clause.
• Castlewood Int'l Corp. v. Miller
  626 F.2d 1200· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that state interests in regulating liquor distribution outweigh federal interests in ATF Ruling 74-6, requiring a reversal of the district court's decision.