Disabled American Veterans' Club, Chapter No. 8 v. Toronto

364 P.2d 830, 12 Utah 2d 213, 1961 Utah LEXIS 220
CourtUtah Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 18, 1961
DocketNo. 9399
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 364 P.2d 830 (Disabled American Veterans' Club, Chapter No. 8 v. Toronto) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Disabled American Veterans' Club, Chapter No. 8 v. Toronto, 364 P.2d 830, 12 Utah 2d 213, 1961 Utah LEXIS 220 (Utah 1961).

Opinion

WADE, Chief Justice.

This appeal is from a judgment of the Third Judicial District Court dismissing the petition of appellant herein for a writ prohibiting the Secretary of State for the State of Utah from proceeding with a hearing on an order to show cause why appellant’s charter should not be revoked.

The record discloses that appellant pleaded guilty to a violation of the Utah State Liquor Law. Under the provisions of Sec. 16-6-13, U.C.A.1953, as amended by Laws of Utah for 1955, it is the duty of the Secretary of State to hold a hearing to determine whether nonprofit corporations incorporated or operating under the provisions of Chapter 6, U.C.A.1953, are operating in accordance with that law. That law prohibits, among other things, the violation of the Utah State Liquor Control Act. Upon [214]*214finding such a violation the Secretary “shall revoke the charter of such corporation.”

The record further discloses that respondent held a hearing in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 16-6-13, U.C.A. as amended in 1955, and after such hearing revoked appellant’s charter and ordered the forfeiture of the bond in the sum of $5,000, which was filed by appellant with the Secretary of State in compliance with the provisions of Sec. 16-6-13.1.1

Appellant does not seek a reversal of the Secretary of State’s order revoking its charter, as well it might not under its plea of guilty to a violation of the Liquor Control Act, but argues that the Secretary of State should not have ordered the forfeiture of its bond because the District Court had fined the corporation $1,000 upon its plea-, of guilty of the liquor law violation. We-find no merit to such argument. The bond' was given for the express purpose of ensuring compliance with the laws of the State of Utah and was subject to forfeiture upon, a revocation of the charter of a corporation for a violation of such laws. The action. of a court in fining appellant upon a finding of guilt for a liquor law violation can-in no way affect appellant’s liability under its bond given to the Secretary of State as a condition to being allowed to maintain < premises upon which liquor could be stored . or consumed.

Affirmed. Costs to respondent.

henriod, McDonough, callis--TER and CROCKETT, JJ, concur.

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

Related

State v. Starlight Club
406 P.2d 912 (Utah Supreme Court, 1965)
Bowling Club v. Toronto
403 P.2d 651 (Utah Supreme Court, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
364 P.2d 830, 12 Utah 2d 213, 1961 Utah LEXIS 220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disabled-american-veterans-club-chapter-no-8-v-toronto-utah-1961.