Bischoff v. Sarkas

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Bischoff v. Sarkas

360 A.2d 115, 116 R.I. 960, 1976 R.I. LEXIS 1554

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedJuly 19, 1976

DocketM. P. No. 76-282

StatusPublished

This text of 360 A.2d 115 (Bischoff v. Sarkas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bischoff v. Sarkas, 360 A.2d 115, 116 R.I. 960, 1976 R.I. LEXIS 1554 (R.I. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

This matter came on to be heard on the petitioners’ prayer for an ex parte stay of the issuance of a liquor license pending a determination by this court as to whether the writ of certiorari will issue. The prayer for a stay is denied. A conference relative to the issuance of a stay was attended [961]*961by attorneys for all interested parties. The applicant was informed that should it see fit to take advantage of its license, it ran the risk that a stay might be issued when this matter is considered by the entire court at its August 5, 1976, conference.

Archibald B. Kenyon, Jr., Town Solicitor, Kenyon & Aukerman, for petitioners. Office of the Attorney General, Julius C. Michaelson, Atty. Gen., Forrest Avila, Spec. Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

This matter came on to be heard on the petitioners’ prayer for an ex parte stay of the issuance of a liquor license pending a determination by this court as to whether the writ of certiorari will issue. The prayer for a stay is denied. A conference relative to the issuance of a stay was attended [961]*961by attorneys for all interested parties. The applicant was informed that should it see fit to take advantage of its license, it ran the risk that a stay might be issued when this matter is considered by the entire court at its August 5, 1976, conference.

Archibald B. Kenyon, Jr., Town Solicitor, Kenyon & Aukerman, for petitioners. Office of the Attorney General, Julius C. Michaelson, Atty. Gen., Forrest Avila, Spec. Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

360 A.2d 115, 116 R.I. 960, 1976 R.I. LEXIS 1554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bischoff-v-sarkas-ri-1976.