Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Maryland » Maryland Appellate Court » 2006 » Woodfield v. West River
Woodfield v. West River
State: Maryland
Court: Court of Appeals
Docket No: 3/06
Case Date: 11/06/2006
Preview:In the Circu it Court for A nne Aru ndel Cou nty Case No. C-2003-89084AA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 3 September Term, 2006 ______________________________________

WILLIAM R. WOODFIELD, JR., ET AL. v.

WEST RIVER IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL.

______________________________________ Bell, C.J. Raker Wilner Cathell Harrell Battaglia Greene, JJ. ______________________________________ Opinion by Wilner, J. Cath ell, J. , join s in th e jud gme nt on ly. ______________________________________ Filed: November 6, 2006

The dispute here is over a Class H (Beer, Wine, Liquor) Music and Sunday license issued by the Board of Lice nse Comm issioners for Anne A rundel County to William Woodfield, Jr., acting for Superior Woodfields, L.L.C. (Superior W oodfields). 1 Respon dent, West River Improvement Association, along with many members of the Galesville com mun ity, protested the Superior Woodfields application, contending, among other things, that one Charles Bassford, who already had an interest in two or more other liquor licenses in the county, would also have an interest in this one, and that the law prohibited a person from h aving a n interes t in more than on e license . In announcing the Board's decision to issue the license, the chairman, at least infer entia lly, opined that sufficient evidence had not been produced to establish that Bassford would have any pecuniary interest in the license. Upon respondent's petition for judicial review, however, the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County concluded that "by any reason able inte rpretatio n of the eviden ce pres ented, a trier of fact would conclude that Mr. Bassford has a direct or indirect interest in this applicant [Superior Woodfields] as well as two other liquor license holders in Anne Arundel County," and, on that ground, reversed the Board's decision. A divided C ourt of Special Appea ls affirmed the Circuit C ourt judgm ent. It agreed that the Board "erroneously ignored mounting and uncontroverted testimony that

Maryland Code, Art. 2B,
Download Woodfield v. West River.pdf

Maryland Law

Maryland State Laws
Maryland Court
Maryland Tax
Maryland Labor Laws
Maryland Agencies

Comments

Tips