OF TEXAS
AunTIN 11. -rExAn
July 24, 1957
Honorable Stanley Kacir Opinion No. WW-189
County Attorney
Bell County Re: Does Attorney General's Opin-
Belton, Texas ion No. V-1121 apply to the
issuance of a Beer RetailerIs
On-Premises License to a non-
profft, no capital stock,
Dear Sir: Texas corporation?
You have requested our opinion as to the applicebllity
of Attorney General's Opinion No. V-1121 to the provisions of
Section 5' (2) (h), Article 667, Vernon's Penal Code. More spe-
cifically, your inquiry concerns whether a non-profit corpora-
tion having no capital stock can qualify for a beer retailer's
on-premise license under the above section, which reads in part
as follows:
"Section 5.
"Any person may file an application for a
license as a Manufacti.per, Distributor or Retail
Dealer of beer invacatlon or in termtime with
the County Judge of the county in which the ap-
plicant desires to engage in such business. The
County Judge shall refuse to approve the appli-
cation for such license if he has reasonable
grounds to believe and finds any of the following
to be true:
“2. If a Distributor or Retailer:
'1. . .
"(h) If a corporation, that the applicant
iS not incorporated under the laws of this State;
or that at least fifty-one percent (517) of the
stock of such corporation is not owned at all
times by citizens who have resided within this
State for a period of three (3) years and who pos-
sess the qualifications required of other appli-
cants for licenses; . . *'I
Honorable Stanley Kacir, page 2 hW189)
Opinion V-1121 involved a determination of a similar
problem concerning packa e store permits under the terms of
+&ion 18 of Article 66% , Vernon’s Penal Code, which is as fol-
.
“Se ct ion 18a
Wo person who has not been a citizen of Texas
for a period of three (3) years immediately preced-
ing the filing of his application therefor shall be
eligible to receive a permit under this Act. No
permit shall be issued to a corporation unless the
same be incorporated under the laws of the State and
unless at least fifty-one percent (51$) of the stock
of the corporation is owned at all times by citizens
who have resided within the State for a period of
three years and who possess the qualifications re-
quired of other applicants for permits; . . .‘I
In our opinion the provisions of Section 5 (2) (h) of
Article 667, and Section 18 of Article 666 are identical in re-
quiring that a corporation be both a domestic corporation and
be owned to the extent of 51% of its capital stock by residents
of Texas who possess the qualifications required of other appli-
cants for permits or licenses. Section 18 of Article 666 states
the requirement positively, and states that no permit shall is-
sue unless both requirements are fulfilled. Section 5 (2.) (h)
of Article 667 states the m requirements negatively, and pro-
vides that the County Judge shall refuse to issue a license if
either of the requirements are found m to exist.
This office, in Opinion V-1121, held that a non-profit,
no capital stock corporation could not qualify for a package
store permit o @diehere reaffirm the reasoning and holding of
that opinion and appiy it to the present inquiry as a basis for
our present opinion. Par your convenience we have attached a
copy of Opinion V-1121.
You are therefore advised that, applying the construc-
tion and reasoning of Opinion V-1121, a non-profit, no capital
stock corporation cannot qualify for the issuance of a beer re-
tailer’s on-premise license under the provisions of Section 5
(2) (h) of Article 667, Vernon’s Penal Code. If such a corpora-
tion were to apply for such a license it would be the mandatory
duty of the County Judge to refuse to approve the application
under the above Section of the Liquor Control Act.
/ -
..
.
Honorable Stanley Kacir, page 3 (WW-189)
K beer retailer's on-premise license may not
be issued to a non-profit, no capi.tal stock cor-
poration because such corporation cannot qualify
under Section 5 (2) (h) of Article 667, V.P.C.
Yours very truly,
JHM:zt:wb
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
H. Grady Chandler, Chairman
C. K. Richards
Marvin Thomas
REVIEWEDFOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: Geo. P. Blackburn
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion