State ex rel. Stocker v. City of Laramie

737 P.2d 746, 1987 Wyo. LEXIS 451
CourtWyoming Supreme Court
DecidedMay 29, 1987
DocketNo. 86-296
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 737 P.2d 746 (State ex rel. Stocker v. City of Laramie) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Stocker v. City of Laramie, 737 P.2d 746, 1987 Wyo. LEXIS 451 (Wyo. 1987).

Opinion

URBIGKIT, Justice.

Present licensees and the community dealership association contest the granting of two additional liquor licenses for new establishments which would compete with them in the Laramie, Wyoming market area, and now appeal from summary-judgment denial of their claims as presented by declaratory judgment, injunction, mandamus and prohibition. We affirm.

ISSUES

Presented are two issues, (1) the enabling statute § 12-4-101(b), W.S.1977 (July, 1986 Pamphlet), providing for population adjustment of liquor license numbers on a state agency estimate is unconstitutional (improper standard), and (2) legislative delegation of population estimation to a state agency as the formula determinate for issuance of liquor licenses constitutes an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to the executive branch of government (improper method).

Appellees raised a standing issue of a competitor’s right to challenge issuance of additional licenses, which issue shall not be considered by virtue of the simplicity of this decision.

LITIGANTS

Suit was filed by Steve Stocker,1 individually and as President of the Albany County Licensed Beverage Association, the Association separately, and a number of licensed establishments in Laramie. Named as defendants as the issuing body were the City, Mayor and City Council (City); the State Liquor Commission, State of Wyoming Department of Administration and Fiscal Control (State); D & S, a partnership, d/b/a Justin’s, Gary P. Englemen and Robert Blake; and G & B, Inc., d/b/a North Town Super Market Liquors (appli[748]*748cants). After motions for summary judgment were filed by both plaintiffs and defendants, together with supporting affidavits, the trial court determined that a justi-ciable controversy existed and plaintiffs had standing, and then granted summary judgment to defendants, dismissed plaintiffs’ complaints with prejudice, and denied their motion for summary judgment, all of which validated the two new liquor licenses.2

STATUTES

Wyoming has a state agency monopoly liquor distribution system (except beer) with a population-based private retail county and municipality licensing system.

“(a) Incorporated cities, towns and counties within Wyoming shall license and regulate or prohibit the retail sale of alcoholic and malt beverages under this title. Nothing in this title prohibits a licensing authority of an incorporated city, town or county from issuing less than the total number of allowable retail liquor licenses pursuant to W.S. 12-4-201 or from refusing to issue any license or permit authorized by this title.
“(b) Population figures are based upon the official ten (10) year federal census preceding the time of application. Population figures based upon the official census shall be periodically revised by a state population estimate no later than five (5) years after the federal census publication date.
“(c) Population figures and estimates required by subsection (b) of this section shall be furnished to the appropriate licensing authorities within the state by the department of administration and fiscal control. The maximum number of licenses and permits available for issuance by a licensing authority pursuant to the population formula provided by W.S. 12-4-201, shall be certified and distributed by the commission.” Section 12-4-101(a), (b) and (c), W.S.1977 (July, 1986 Pamphlet).

The constitutional challenge presented by appellants invokes the standard derived from the population-estimate adjustment of subsection (b) and the procedure for adjustment detailed to the Department of Administration and Fiscal Control (DAFC) by subsection (c). Appellants challenge subsection (b) on the basis of vagueness, ambiguity, indefiniteness, and uncertainty, and challenge subsection (c) as an unlawful delegation of legislative power to the executive. We are unpersuaded by the arguments made. Incidentally, no challenge was made to the accuracy or procedure used by DAFC to estimate population, but only to the delegation involved through use of the state agency data although statistical development and analysis constitute a general statutory function of its research and statistic division. See Wyoming Population and Employment Forecast Report, prepared by the Department of Administration and Fiscal Control (9th ed. 1986).

ISSUE I — IMPROPER STANDARD

The principle is axiomatic and frequently enunciated that this court, when presented with a constitutionally based challenge to a statute, applies a strong presumption in favor of constitutionality. Bell v. State, Wyo., 693 P.2d 769 (1985); Thomson v. Wyoming In-Stream Flow Committee, Wyo., 651 P.2d 778 (1982); Meyer v. Kendig, Wyo., 641 P.2d 1235 (1982). For a similar authority, see State v. Hoffman, Utah, 733 P.2d 502 (1987). In application of this standard, we do not find the revision factor of § 12-4-101(b) to be unconstitutional in creating the adjustment process to authorize issuance of liquor licenses. We are not persuaded that the legislature is constrained to federal censuses if it selects population as the basis of the community eligibility to issue liquor licenses. Much of the activity of the academic and industrial society is founded on estimates, and the pure logician might question whether many “facts” are empirically [749]*749exact.3 Certainly population determinations, however designated, are factored with some degree of estimation.

We would find that the meaning of “estimate” as defined by Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (1986), as “a numerical value obtained from a statistical sample and assigned to a population parameter” is sufficient to constitutionally set a standard for the number of emporiums to be authorized to merchandise alcoholic beverages under the purview of Title 12 of the Wyoming statutes. The word “estimate,” although encompassing an opinion formed as to number or amount from imperfect data, has been held to be not an ambiguous term. J.E. Hathman, Inc. v. Sigma Alpha Epsilon Club, Mo., 491 S.W.2d 261, 266 (1973); State ex rel. Reynolds v. Jost, 265 Mo. 51, 175 S.W. 591 (1915). Its ordinary, generally understood meaning can be easily applied. 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction § 47.28 at 223 (1984 ed.). In another context involving valuation, this court has held that appraisal and estimate are terms used interchangeably. State Highway Commission v. Black, Wyo., 417 P.2d 750 (1966). The word “estimate,” as defined to mean fixing the worth, value, size, extent or number, is a designation of a process if a verb, or a result if a noun, and its accuracy is defined by the character of its maker. The estimates of light-year distance to faraway constellations can be compared with the estimate of the gallons of water in the Pacific Ocean. Each, if relevant, would be appropriate for use by the executive and judicial branches of government.

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

Related

STATE EX REL. WORKERS'COMP. v. Brown
805 P.2d 830 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1991)
State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Compensation Division v. Brown
805 P.2d 830 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1991)
Mendicoa v. State
780 P.2d 1346 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1989)
Miller v. Superior Court
72 P.2d 868 (California Supreme Court, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
737 P.2d 746, 1987 Wyo. LEXIS 451, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-stocker-v-city-of-laramie-wyo-1987.