Chapter 1. Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control

§ 67-1-1. Short title.

This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law” of the State of Mississippi.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-02; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

Cross References —

Administration and enforcement of the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law by the department of revenue, see §27-3-31.

Sales tax on alcoholic beverages, see §27-65-25.

Distilled spirits, wine and malt beverages not being subject to control under Controlled Substances Law, see §41-29-111.

Prohibition and punishing for furnishing alcoholic beverages to offenders, or taking such item on property occupied by them, see §§47-5-191 to47-5-195.

Procedures for appeals from decisions of the State Tax Commission, in situations not subject to §§67-1-1 et seq., see §27-3-29.

Board of Tax Appeals to have jurisdiction over all administrative appeals regarding certain decisions and actions of the Department of Revenue under §§67-1-1 et seq., as provided for under §67-1-72, see §27-4-3.

Sale and manufacture of light wine and beer, see §§67-3-1 et seq.

Intoxicating beverage offenses generally, see §§97-31-5 et seq.

Prosecutions for intoxicating beverage offenses generally, see §§99-27-1 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Since the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.) consists of laws relating specifically to one form of alcoholic beverage, it is, as such, special legislation which will prevail over the general statutes dealing with alcohol that are contained in Chapter 1 of Title 67 (67-1-1 et seq). Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

The general rule is that municipalities may not regulate activity that has been preempted by state law and regulation. Regulation of the manufacture, sale, distribution, possession and transportation of intoxicating liquor is preempted by state law. Likewise, designation of qualified resort areas is a matter preempted by state law. Diaz, Oct. 23, 1991, A.G. Op. #91-0681.

The regulation of sales of alcoholic beverages containing 5% or more of alcohol, or intoxicating liquor, is an area wholly within the authority of the State Tax Commission; there is no authority for a municipality to adopt an ordinance that would further regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors by extending the hours during which the sale of such beverages by certain permitted retailers may be lawfully made. Tyner, March 5, 1999, A.G. Op. #99-0074.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Construction and application of statute or ordinance respecting amusements on premises licensed for sale of intoxicating liquor. 4 A.L.R.2d 1216.

Effect of state regulation of liquor sales on municipal power to impose occupation license or tax for revenue. 6 A.L.R.2d 737.

Judicial notice of intoxicating quality, and the like, of liquor or particular liquid, from its name. 49 A.L.R.2d 764.

Validity and construction of measure prohibiting retail alcoholic beverage seller from furnishing free food or drink. 66 A.L.R.2d 758.

Premises liability: liability of innkeeper, restauranteur or tavernkeeper for injury occurring on or about premises to guest or patron by person other than proprietor or his servant. 70 A.L.R.2d 628.

Regulations forbidding employees or entertainers from drinking or mingling with patrons, or soliciting drinks from them. 99 A.L.R.2d 1216.

Liability of hotel or motel operator for injury to guest resulting from assault by third party. 28 A.L.R.4th 80.

Tavernkeeper’s liability to patron for third person’s assault. 43 A.L.R.4th 281.

§ 67-1-3. Prohibition reannounced as law of State.

The policy of this State is reannounced in favor of prohibition of the manufacture, sale, distribution, possession and transportation of intoxicating liquor; and the provisions against such manufacture, sale, distribution, possession and transportation of intoxicating liquor, as contained in Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972 and elsewhere, are hereby redeclared the law of this state. The purpose and intent of this chapter is to vigorously enforce the prohibition laws throughout the state, except in those counties and municipalities voting themselves out from under the prohibition law in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, and, in those counties and municipalities, to require strict regulation and supervision of the manufacture, sale, distribution, possession and transportation of intoxicating liquor under a system of state licensing of manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers, which licenses shall be subject to revocation for violations of this chapter.

All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this chapter are repealed only to the extent of such conflict; however, except as is provided in this chapter, all laws prohibiting the manufacture, sale, distribution and possession of alcoholic beverages, which are not in conflict with this chapter shall remain in full force and effect, and all such laws shall remain in full force and effect in counties and municipalities wherein the manufacture, sale, distribution and possession of alcoholic beverages has not been authorized as a result of an election held under Section 67-1-11 or Section 67-1-14, Mississippi Code of 1972, or as otherwise provided in this chapter.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10265-01, 10265-36; Laws, 1966, §§ 1, 36; Laws, 1990, ch. 569, § 2, eff from and after passage (approved April 9, 1990).

Cross References —

Powers and duties of bureau of drug enforcement, see §41-29-111.

Unlawful alcoholic preparations, see §97-31-5.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

It is apparent from the enumerated powers, functions, duties, and responsibilities reposed in and imposed upon the state tax commission in widely separated parts of the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, that it was the intent of the legislature to grant the commission wide latitude and discretion in considering and acting upon applications for permits to operate retail liquor stores. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Package Store, Inc., 208 So. 2d 46, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1392 (Miss. 1968).

Subsection 3 of Code 1942, § 7545-71 under which all laws and ordinances of a city were made applicable to a noncontiguous municipal airport was repealed by implication by this section to the extent that it conflicted with the provisions of the Local Option Beverage Control Law, so although the city was located in a county where the sale of alcoholic beverages was legal this did not authorize the sale of such beverages at the municipal airport which was located in a “dry” county. Jackson Municipal Airport Authority v. Shivers, 206 So. 2d 190, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1553 (Miss. 1968).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Operation and effect, in dry territory, of general state statute making sale or possession for sale of intoxicating liquor, without a license, an offense. 8 A.L.R.2d 750.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 51 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 46-49, 360.

§ 67-1-5. Definitions.

For the purposes of this chapter and unless otherwise required by the context:

“Alcoholic beverage” means any alcoholic liquid, including wines of more than five percent (5%) of alcohol by weight, capable of being consumed as a beverage by a human being, but shall not include light wine and beer, as defined in Section 67-3-3, Mississippi Code of 1972, but shall include native wines. The words “alcoholic beverage” shall not include ethyl alcohol manufactured or distilled solely for fuel purposes or beer of an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight if the beer is legally manufactured in this state for sale in another state.

“Alcohol” means the product of distillation of any fermented liquid, whatever the origin thereof, and includes synthetic ethyl alcohol, but does not include denatured alcohol or wood alcohol.

“Distilled spirits” means any beverage containing more than four percent (4%) of alcohol by weight produced by distillation of fermented grain, starch, molasses or sugar, including dilutions and mixtures of these beverages.

“Wine” or “vinous liquor” means any product obtained from the alcoholic fermentation of the juice of sound, ripe grapes, fruits or berries and made in accordance with the revenue laws of the United States.

“Person” means and includes any individual, partnership, corporation, association or other legal entity whatsoever.

“Manufacturer” means any person engaged in manufacturing, distilling, rectifying, blending or bottling any alcoholic beverage.

“Wholesaler” means any person, other than a manufacturer, engaged in distributing or selling any alcoholic beverage at wholesale for delivery within or without this state when such sale is for the purpose of resale by the purchaser.

“Retailer” means any person who sells, distributes, or offers for sale or distribution, any alcoholic beverage for use or consumption by the purchaser and not for resale.

“State Tax Commission,” “commission” or “department” means the Department of Revenue of the State of Mississippi, which shall create a division in its organization to be known as the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division. Any reference to the commission or the department hereafter means the powers and duties of the Department of Revenue with reference to supervision of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division.

“Division” means the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the Department of Revenue.

“Municipality” means any incorporated city or town of this state.

“Hotel” means an establishment within a municipality, or within a qualified resort area approved as such by the department, where, in consideration of payment, food and lodging are habitually furnished to travelers and wherein are located at least twenty (20) adequately furnished and completely separate sleeping rooms with adequate facilities that persons usually apply for and receive as overnight accommodations. Hotels in towns or cities of more than twenty-five thousand (25,000) population are similarly defined except that they must have fifty (50) or more sleeping rooms. Any such establishment described in this paragraph with less than fifty (50) beds shall operate one or more regular dining rooms designed to be constantly frequented by customers each day. When used in this chapter, the word “hotel” shall also be construed to include any establishment that meets the definition of “bed and breakfast inn” as provided in this section.

“Restaurant” means:

A place which is regularly and in a bona fide manner used and kept open for the serving of meals to guests for compensation, which has suitable seating facilities for guests, and which has suitable kitchen facilities connected therewith for cooking an assortment of foods and meals commonly ordered at various hours of the day; the service of such food as sandwiches and salads only shall not be deemed in compliance with this requirement. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, no place shall qualify as a restaurant under this chapter unless twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the revenue derived from such place shall be from the preparation, cooking and serving of meals and not from the sale of beverages, or unless the value of food given to and consumed by customers is equal to twenty-five percent (25%) or more of total revenue; or

Any privately owned business located in a building in a historic district where the district is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, where the building has a total occupancy rating of not less than one thousand (1,000) and where the business regularly utilizes ten thousand (10,000) square feet or more in the building for live entertainment, including not only the stage, lobby or area where the audience sits and/or stands, but also any other portion of the building necessary for the operation of the business, including any kitchen area, bar area, storage area and office space, but excluding any area for parking. In addition to the other requirements of this subparagraph, the business must also serve food to guests for compensation within the building and derive the majority of its revenue from event-related fees, including, but not limited to, admission fees or ticket sales to live entertainment in the building, and from the rental of all or part of the facilities of the business in the building to another party for a specific event or function.

“Club” means an association or a corporation:

Organized or created under the laws of this state for a period of five (5) years prior to July 1, 1966;

Organized not primarily for pecuniary profit but for the promotion of some common object other than the sale or consumption of alcoholic beverages;

Maintained by its members through the payment of annual dues;

Owning, hiring or leasing a building or space in a building of such extent and character as may be suitable and adequate for the reasonable and comfortable use and accommodation of its members and their guests;

The affairs and management of which are conducted by a board of directors, board of governors, executive committee, or similar governing body chosen by the members at a regular meeting held at some periodic interval; and

No member, officer, agent or employee of which is paid, or directly or indirectly receives, in the form of a salary or other compensation any profit from the distribution or sale of alcoholic beverages to the club or to members or guests of the club beyond such salary or compensation as may be fixed and voted at a proper meeting by the board of directors or other governing body out of the general revenues of the club.

The department may, in its discretion, waive the five-year provision of this paragraph. In order to qualify under this paragraph, a club must file with the department, at the time of its application for a license under this chapter, two (2) copies of a list of the names and residences of its members and similarly file, within ten (10) days after the election of any additional member, his name and address. Each club applying for a license shall also file with the department at the time of the application a copy of its articles of association, charter of incorporation, bylaws or other instruments governing the business and affairs thereof.

“Qualified resort area” means any area or locality outside of the limits of incorporated municipalities in this state commonly known and accepted as a place which regularly and customarily attracts tourists, vacationists and other transients because of its historical, scenic or recreational facilities or attractions, or because of other attributes which regularly and customarily appeal to and attract tourists, vacationists and other transients in substantial numbers; however, no area or locality shall so qualify as a resort area until it has been duly and properly approved as such by the department. The department may not approve an area as a qualified resort area after July 1, 2018, if any portion of such proposed area is located within two (2) miles of a convent or monastery that is located in a county traversed by Interstate 55 and U.S. Highway 98. A convent or monastery may waive such distance restrictions in favor of allowing approval by the department of an area as a qualified resort area. Such waiver shall be in written form from the owner, the governing body, or the appropriate officer of the convent or monastery having the authority to execute such a waiver, and the waiver shall be filed with and verified by the department before becoming effective.

The department may approve an area or locality outside of the limits of an incorporated municipality that is in the process of being developed as a qualified resort area if such area or locality, when developed, can reasonably be expected to meet the requisites of the definition of the term “qualified resort area.” In such a case, the status of qualified resort area shall not take effect until completion of the development.

The term includes any state park which is declared a resort area by the department; however, such declaration may only be initiated in a written request for resort area status made to the department by the Executive Director of the Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks, and no permit for the sale of any alcoholic beverage, as defined in this chapter, except an on-premises retailer’s permit, shall be issued for a hotel, restaurant or bed and breakfast inn in such park.

The term includes:

1. The clubhouses associated with the state park golf courses at the Lefleur’s Bluff State Park, the John Kyle State Park, the Percy Quin State Park and the Hugh White State Park;

2. The clubhouse and associated golf course where the golf course is adjacent to one or more planned residential developments and the golf course and all such developments collectively include at least seven hundred fifty (750) acres and at least four hundred (400) residential units;

3. Any facility located on property that is a game reserve with restricted access that consists of at least three thousand (3,000) contiguous acres with no public roads and that offers as a service hunts for a fee to overnight guests of the facility;

4. Any facility located on federal property surrounding a lake and designated as a recreational area by the United States Army Corps of Engineers that consists of at least one thousand five hundred (1,500) acres;

5. Any facility that is located in a municipality that is bordered by the Pearl River, traversed by Mississippi Highway 25, adjacent to the boundaries of the Jackson International Airport and is located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law; however, any such facility may only be located in areas designated by the governing authorities of such municipality;

6. Any municipality with a population in excess of ten thousand (10,000) according to the latest federal decennial census that is located in a county that is bordered by the Pearl River and is not traversed by Interstate Highway 20, with a population in excess of forty-five thousand (45,000) according to the latest federal decennial census; however, the governing authorities of such a municipality may by ordinance:

a. Specify the hours of operation of facilities that offer alcoholic beverages for sale;

b. Specify the percentage of revenue that facilities that offer alcoholic beverages for sale must derive from the preparation, cooking and serving of meals and not from the sale of beverages;

c. Designate the areas in which facilities that offer alcoholic beverages for sale may be located;

7. The West Pearl Restaurant Tax District as defined in Chapter 912, Local and Private Laws of 2007;

8. a. Land that is located in any county in which Mississippi Highway 43 and Mississippi Highway 25 intersect and:

A. Owned by the Pearl River Valley Water Supply District, and/or

B. Located within the Reservoir Community District, zoned commercial, east of Old Fannin Road, north of Regatta Drive, south of Spillway Road, west of Hugh Ward Boulevard and accessible by Old Fannin Road, Spillway Road, Spann Drive and/or Lake Vista Place, and/or

C. Located within the Reservoir Community District, zoned commercial, west of Old Fannin Road, south of Spillway Road and extending to the boundary of the corporate limits of the City of Flowood, Mississippi;

b. The board of supervisors of such county, with respect to B and C of this item 8, may by resolution or other order:

A. Specify the hours of operation of facilities that offer alcoholic beverages for sale,

B. Specify the percentage of revenue that facilities that offer alcoholic beverages for sale must derive from the preparation, cooking and serving of meals and not from the sale of beverages, and

C. Designate the areas in which facilities that offer alcoholic beverages for sale may be located;

9. Any facility located on property that is a game reserve with restricted access that consists of at least eight hundred (800) contiguous acres with no public roads, that offers as a service hunts for a fee to overnight guests of the facility, and has accommodations for at least fifty (50) overnight guests;

10. Any facility that:

a. Consists of at least six thousand (6,000) square feet being heated and cooled along with an additional adjacent area that consists of at least two thousand two hundred (2,200) square feet regardless of whether heated and cooled,

b. For a fee is used to host events such as weddings, reunions and conventions,

c. Provides lodging accommodations regardless of whether part of the facility and/or located adjacent to or in close proximity to the facility, and

d. Is located on property that consists of at least thirty (30) contiguous acres;

11. Any facility and related property:

a. Located on property that consists of at least one hundred twenty-five (125) contiguous acres and consisting of an eighteen (18) hole golf course, and/or located in a facility that consists of at least eight thousand (8,000) square feet being heated and cooled,

b. Used for the purpose of providing meals and hosting events, and

c. Used for the purpose of teaching culinary arts courses and/or turf management and grounds keeping courses, and/or outdoor recreation and leadership courses;

12. Any facility and related property that:

a. Consist of at least eight thousand (8,000) square feet being heated and cooled,

b. For a fee is used to host events,

c. Is used for the purpose of culinary arts courses, and/or outdoor recreation and leadership courses;

13. The clubhouse and associated golf course where the golf course is adjacent to one or more residential developments and the golf course and all such developments collectively include at least two hundred (200) acres and at least one hundred fifty (150) residential units and are located a. in a county that has voted against coming out from under the dry law; and b. outside of but in close proximity to a municipality in such county which has voted under Section 67-1-14, after January 1, 2013, to come out from under the dry law;

14. The clubhouse and associated eighteen (18) hole golf course located in a municipality traversed by Interstate Highway 55 and U.S. Highway 51 that has voted to come out from under the dry law;

15. Land that is planned for mixed use development and consists of at least two hundred (200) contiguous acres with one or more planned residential developments collectively planned to include at least two hundred (200) residential units when completed and which land is located:

a. In a county that has voted to come out from under the dry law,

b. Outside the corporate limits of any municipality in such county and adjacent to or in close proximity to a golf course located in a municipality in such county, and

c. Within one (1) mile of a state institution of higher learning.

The status of these municipalities, districts, clubhouses, facilities, golf courses and areas described in subparagraph (iii) of this paragraph (o) as qualified resort areas does not require any declaration of same by the department.

“Native wine” means any product, produced in Mississippi for sale, having an alcohol content not to exceed twenty-one percent (21%) by weight and made in accordance with revenue laws of the United States, which shall be obtained primarily from the alcoholic fermentation of the juice of ripe grapes, fruits, berries or vegetables grown and produced in Mississippi; provided that bulk, concentrated or fortified wines used for blending may be produced without this state and used in producing native wines. The department shall adopt and promulgate rules and regulations to permit a producer to import such bulk and/or fortified wines into this state for use in blending with native wines without payment of any excise tax that would otherwise accrue thereon.

“Native winery” means any place or establishment within the State of Mississippi where native wine is produced, in whole or in part, for sale.

“Bed and breakfast inn” means an establishment within a municipality where in consideration of payment, breakfast and lodging are habitually furnished to travelers and wherein are located not less than eight (8) and not more than nineteen (19) adequately furnished and completely separate sleeping rooms with adequate facilities, that persons usually apply for and receive as overnight accommodations; however, such restriction on the minimum number of sleeping rooms shall not apply to establishments on the National Register of Historic Places. No place shall qualify as a bed and breakfast inn under this chapter unless on the date of the initial application for a license under this chapter more than fifty percent (50%) of the sleeping rooms are located in a structure formerly used as a residence.

“Board” shall refer to the Board of Tax Appeals of the State of Mississippi.

“Spa facility” means an establishment within a municipality or qualified resort area and owned by a hotel where, in consideration of payment, patrons receive from licensed professionals a variety of private personal care treatments such as massages, facials, waxes, exfoliation and hairstyling.

“Art studio or gallery” means an establishment within a municipality or qualified resort area that is in the sole business of allowing patrons to view and/or purchase paintings and other creative artwork.

“Cooking school” means an establishment within a municipality or qualified resort area and owned by a nationally recognized company that offers an established culinary education curriculum and program where, in consideration of payment, patrons are given scheduled professional group instruction on culinary techniques. For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of cooking school shall not include schools or classes offered by grocery stores, convenience stores or drugstores.

“Campus” means property owned by a public school district, community or junior college, college or university in this state where educational courses are taught, school functions are held, tests and examinations are administered or academic course credits are awarded; however, the term shall not include any “restaurant” or “hotel” that is located on property owned by a community or junior college, college or university in this state, and is operated by a third party who receives all revenue generated from food and alcoholic beverage sales.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-05; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 5; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 12; Laws, 1977, ch. 488, § 2; Laws, 1980, ch. 348, § 1; Laws, 1984, ch. 425, § 1; Laws, 1987, ch. 358; Laws, 1988, ch. 384; Laws, 1990, ch. 569, § 3; Laws, 1994, ch. 558, § 20; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 2; Laws, 1999, ch. 453, § 19; Laws, 2004, ch. 397, § 1; Laws, 2008, ch. 366, § 1; Laws, 2009, ch. 465, § 1; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 126; Laws, 2009, ch. 558, § 1; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 2; Laws, 2012, ch. 428, § 1; Laws, 2012, ch. 501, § 7; Laws, 2014, ch. 346, § 1; Laws, 2015, ch. 413, § 1; Laws, 2016, ch. 401, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2016; Laws, 2018, ch. 383, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2018; Laws, 2018, ch. 438, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2018.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 126 of ch. 492, Laws of 2009, effective July 1, 2010 (approved on April 6, 2009), amended this section. Section 1 of ch. 465, Laws of 2009, effective July 1, 2009 (approved March 30, 2009) and Section 1 of ch. 558, Laws of 2009, effective from and after May 26, 2009, also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of all of the above amendments pursuant to Section 1-1-109 which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision, and Publication authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision, and Publication ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the July 13, 2009, meeting of the Committee.

Section 2 of Chapter 323, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), Section 1 of Chapter 428, Laws of 2012, effective from and after passage (approved April 18, 2012), and Section 7 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 30, 2012), amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of all three amendments, pursuant to Section 1-1-109 which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the August 16, 2012, meeting of the Committee.

Section 1 of Chapter 383, Laws of 2018, effective from and after July 1, 2018 (approved March 19, 2018), amended this section. Section 1 of Chapter 438, Laws of 2018, effective from and after July 1, 2018 (approved April 12, 2018), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 1 of Chapter 438, Laws of 2018, which contains language that specifically provides that it supersedes §67-1-5 as amended by Section 1 of Chapter 383, Laws of 2018.

Editor's Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

On May 26, 2009, the United States Attorney General interposed no objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended and extended, to the amendment of this section by Laws of 2009, ch. 558.

Amendment Notes —

The 2004 amendment redesignated former (n)(1) through (n)(6) as present (n)(i) through (n)(vi); rewrote (o)(iii) to include clubhouses associated with certain subdivisions in the definition of the term “qualified resort area”; and made stylistic changes throughout.

The 2008 amendment, in (o)(iii), added 3, and made minor stylistic changes; and in the last paragraph of (o), inserted “facilities” preceding “and golf courses.”

The first 2009 amendment (ch. 465), inserted “described in subparagraph (iii) of this paragraph (o)” in the last paragraph of (o); and added (s)-(u).

The second 2009 amendment (ch. 492), in the version effective from and after July 1, 2010, in (i), substituted “'State Tax Commission,' 'Commission' or 'department' means the Department of Revenue” for “Commission' means the State Tax Commission” at the beginning, and in the second sentence, inserted “or the department,” and substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission”; substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission” in (j); substituted “department” for “commission” everywhere it appears in ( l ), (n), (o) and (p); and added (s).

The third 2009 amendment (ch. 558) added (o)(iii)4. through 7; and inserted “municipalities, districts” in the last paragraph of (o).

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323) substituted “but shall not include light wine and beer, as defined in Section 67-3-3” for “but shall not include wine containing five percent (5%) or less of alcohol by weight and shall not include beer containing not more than five percent (5%) of alcohol by weight, as provided for in Section 67-3-5” in the first sentence of (a); and inserted “the” preceding “Board of Tax Appeals” in (s).

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 428), in (m), added “Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph” at the beginning of the last sentence in (i); added (ii); and made minor stylistic changes.

The third 2012 amendment (ch. 501), in (a), substituted “but shall not include light wine and beer, as defined in Section 67-3-3” for “but shall not include wine containing five percent (5%) or less of alcohol by weight and shall not include beer containing not more than five percent (5%) of alcohol by weight, as provided for in Section 67-3-5” in the first sentence and added “or beer of an alcoholic content . . . for sale in another state” at the end of the last sentence.

The 2014 amendment added (o)(iii)8 and (o)(iii)9; in the paragraph following (o)(iii)9, substituted a comma for “and” and inserted “and areas” following “golf courses”; and made minor punctuation changes throughout.

The 2015 amendment added “however, the governing authorities of such a municipality may by ordinance:” at the end of (o)(iii)6; and added (o)(iii)6.a. through c., and (o)(iii)10 through 12.

The 2016 amendment, in (o)(iii)8, deleted “owned by the Pearl River Valley Water Supply District and” following “Land that is” and added a. and b., and added (o)(iii)13 and made a related stylistic change.

The first 2018 amendment (ch. 383, § 1) added (o)(iii)14.

The second 2018 amendment (ch. 438, § 1) added the last three sentences of (o); in (o)(iii), redesignated former 8. as present 8.a. and added 8.b., in 8.a., redesignated former 8.a. and b. as 8.a.A. and B. and added C., deleted former 12.c., which read: “Is located on property on or near a bayou or other waterway,” and redesignated former 12.d. as 12.c., added 15., and made related changes; and added (w).

Cross References —

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Application of definitions to alcoholic beverage taxes, see §27-71-3.

Application of definition of alcoholic beverage, as defined in this section, to additional markup on such beverages for alcoholism treatment and rehabilitation fund, see §27-71-7.

Labeling requirements for light wines and beer, see §27-71-509.

Application of definition of alcoholic beverage to provisions relative to conduct of Department of Corrections officers and employees, see §47-5-191.

Provisions relating to state parks, see §§55-3-1 et seq.

Applicability of this section to the qualifications for a Class 2, Temporary retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Temporary permit for those seeking to transfer either a package retailer’s permit or an on-premises retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Provision that no “on-premises” retailer’s permit shall be renewed for any “hotel” or “restaurant” unless the commission is satisfied that the holder continues to meet the requirements of a hotel or restaurant, as defined in this section, see §67-1-63.

Right of native wineries to advertise sale of native wines, see §67-1-85.

Native Wines Law, see §67-5-1 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Phrase “alcoholic beverage” does not as matter of law exclude beer when phrase is used outside Chapter 1 of Title 67 of Mississippi Statutes. Wilson ex rel. Wilson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Co., 830 F.2d 588, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 14063 (5th Cir. Miss. 1987).

Policy of liability insurance covering convenience store, which policy excluded coverage for bodily injury for which insured may be held liable by reason of selling, serving or giving of any alcoholic beverage to minor, excludes coverage for bodily injury by reason of selling, serving or giving of “beer”, even though definition of alcoholic beverage under state law excludes beer, as common and ordinary meaning of beer is beverage containing alcohol; liability policy which excluded coverage for bodily injury for which store was liable by reason of selling of alcoholic beverage to minor did not cover bodily injuries sustained in accident caused by underaged motorist’s intoxication from drinking beer which he bought at store, despite statute which excluded beer from definition of alcoholic beverages. Wilson ex rel. Wilson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Co., 659 F. Supp. 553, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13856 (S.D. Miss.), aff'd, 830 F.2d 588, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 14063 (5th Cir. Miss. 1987).

Inasmuch as Code 1942, § 10625-05 excludes from the definition of “alcoholic beverage” beer and wine of not more than 4 percent of alcohol by weight, the authority conferred upon agents of the alcoholic beverage commission under Code 1942, §§ 10265-11 and 10265-17 does not authorize and empower them to check a retailer’s beer license to see whether it was in date or to inspect beer stock to determine whether it was Mississippi-taxed beer. Jolliff v. State, 215 So. 2d 234, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1338 (Miss. 1968), overruled, Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982), but see Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

The production and sale of native wine in a legally “dry” county is lawful. Cadle, January 22, 1999, A.G. Op. #98-0796.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

What constitutes “sale” of liquor in violation of statute or ordinance. 89 A.L.R.3d 551.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 3 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 1, 2, 3.

§ 67-1-7. General applicability of chapter.

  1. Except as otherwise provided in Section 67-9-1 for the transportation and possession of limited amounts of alcoholic beverages for the use of an alcohol processing permittee, and subject to all of the provisions and restrictions contained in this chapter, the manufacture, sale, distribution, possession and transportation of alcoholic beverages shall be lawful, subject to the restrictions hereinafter imposed, in those counties and municipalities of this state in which, at a local option election called and held for that purpose under the provisions of this chapter, a majority of the qualified electors voting in such election shall vote in favor thereof. Except as otherwise provided in Section 67-1-51 for holders of a caterer’s permit, the manufacture, sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages shall not be permissible or lawful in counties except in (a) incorporated municipalities located within such counties, (b) qualified resort areas within such counties approved as such by the State Tax Commission, or (c) clubs within such counties, whether within a municipality or not. The manufacture, sale, distribution and possession of native wines shall be lawful in any location within any such county except those locations where the manufacture, sale or distribution is prohibited by law other than this section or by regulations of the commission.
  2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, within any state park or any state park facility that has been declared a qualified resort area by the commission, and within any qualified resort area as defined under Section 67-1-5(o)(iii), an on-premises retailer’s permit may be issued for the qualified resort area, and the permittee may lawfully sell alcoholic beverages for consumption on his licensed premises regardless of whether or not the county or municipality in which the qualified resort area is located has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law, and it shall be lawful to receive, store, sell, possess and consume alcoholic beverages on the licensed premises, and to sell, distribute and transport alcoholic beverages to the licensed premises.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-04; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 4; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 13; Laws, 1990, ch. 569, § 4; Laws, 1994, ch. 558, § 21; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 1; Laws, 2004, ch. 397, § 2; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 6; Laws, 2008, ch. 366, § 2; Laws, 2009, ch. 558, § 3, eff May 26, 2009 (the date the United States Attorney General interposed no objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to the amendment of this section.).

Editor’s Notes —

On May 26, 2009, the United States Attorney General interposed no objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to the amendment of this section by Laws of 2009, ch. 558.

Amendment Notes —

The 2004 amendment rewrote (2) to authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages at clubhouses associated with certain subdivisions regardless of whether the county in which the clubhouse is located has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law.

The 2006 amendment inserted “Except as otherwise provided in Section 67-1-51 for holders of a caterer’s permit” at the beginning of the next-to-last sentence of (1).

The 2008 amendment, in (2), substituted “that has been declared” for “which has been declared,” “within any qualified resort area as defined under Section 67-1-5(o)(iii)” for “any clubhouse or golf course that is a qualified resort area under Section 67-1-5(o)(iii),” and “issued for the qualified resort area” for “issued for the clubhouse.”

The 2009 amendment substituted “qualified resort area is located” for “park or clubhouse is located” in (2).

Cross References —

Provisions relating to state parks, see §§55-3-1 et seq.

Native Wines Law, see §67-5-1 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Ordinance prohibiting commercial establishments from allowing consumption of alcoholic beverages between midnight and 7:00 a.m., which defined “consumption” to include possession in open containers as well as ingestion, was not preempted be statute expressly permitting possession of alcoholic beverages in “wet” municipalities absent clear expression of legislative intent to permit consumption, as opposed to mere possession, without limitation in wet areas, given broad grant of authority to municipalities to regulate impact of alcoholic beverages upon public health, morals, and safety and public policy favoring prevention of alcohol-related altercations and motor vehicle accidents, as limiting possession of opened containers was reasonable and necessary to enforce limitations on consumption. Maynard v. City of Tupelo, 691 So. 2d 385, 1997 Miss. LEXIS 94 (Miss. 1997).

In counties where the general prohibition laws have been suspended through legalization of the sale of alcoholic liquors by an election held under the local option alcoholic beverage control law, in order to charge an unlawful sale the indictment or affidavit must charge that the local option law is in effect in that county, and sufficient facts to show a violation of one of the provisions of the local option law. Wortham v. State, 219 So. 2d 923, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1435 (Miss. 1969).

In a county in which the general prohibition laws had been suspended, it was error to permit the amendment of an indictment charging a violation of those laws so as to charge the commission of an offense prohibited under the local option beverage control law. Wortham v. State, 219 So. 2d 923, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1435 (Miss. 1969).

An indictment which charges an unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor in violation of the general prohibition laws fails to charge an indictable offense where the act occurred in a county where those laws had been suspended by an election held under the local option alcoholic beverage control law. Wortham v. State, 219 So. 2d 923, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1435 (Miss. 1969).

The state tax commission not only has the authority as a legislative administrative agency to hold a hearing upon the application of a county board of supervisors to determine “resort areas” but it was the commission’s duty to hold a public hearing upon the application; and a failure to conduct a hearing which is required by statute would have been unlawful, arbitrary, and capricious. Graves v. Rhoden, 218 So. 2d 424, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1598 (Miss. 1969).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Planning commission pursuant to a zoning ordinance may not deny a conditional use permit to an owner of a package store who has obtained a license to sell alcoholic beverages from the State Tax Commission. Baskin, April 25, 1997, A.G. Op. #97-0139.

Municipalities may not regulate activity that has been preempted by state law and regulation. Moore, Nov. 21, 1997, A.G. Op. #97-0708.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 55 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 80 et seq.

§ 67-1-9. Alcoholic beverages prohibited except as authorized in this chapter; penalties.

  1. It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, distill, brew, sell, possess, import into this state, export from the state, transport, distribute, warehouse, store, solicit, take order for, bottle, rectify, blend, treat, mix or process any alcoholic beverage except as authorized in this chapter. However, nothing contained herein shall prevent importers, wineries and distillers of alcoholic beverages from storing such alcoholic beverages in private bonded warehouses located within the State of Mississippi for the ultimate use and benefit of the Department of Revenue as provided in Section 67-1-41. The department is hereby authorized to promulgate rules and regulations for the establishment of such private bonded warehouses and for the control of alcoholic beverages stored in such warehouses. Additionally, nothing herein contained shall prevent any duly licensed practicing physician or dentist from possessing or using alcoholic liquor in the strict practice of his profession, or prevent any hospital or other institution caring for sick and diseased persons, from possessing and using alcoholic liquor for the treatment of bona fide patients of such hospital or other institution. Any drugstore employing a licensed pharmacist may possess and use alcoholic liquors in the combination of prescriptions of duly licensed physicians. The possession and dispensation of wine by an authorized representative of any church for the purpose of conducting any bona fide rite or religious ceremony conducted by such church shall not be prohibited by this chapter.
  2. Any person, upon conviction of any provision of this section, shall be punished as follows:
    1. By a fine of not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), or by imprisonment in the county jail not less than one (1) week nor more than three (3) months, or both, for the first conviction under this section.
    2. By a fine of not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or by imprisonment in the county jail not less than sixty (60) days, nor more than six (6) months, or both fine and imprisonment, for the second conviction for violating this section.
    3. By a fine of not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or by imprisonment in the State Penitentiary not less than one (1) year, nor more than five (5) years, or both fine and imprisonment, for conviction the third time under this section for the violation thereof after having been twice convicted of its violation.
  3. Nothing in this section shall make it unlawful to transport bottles or containers of alcoholic beverages that are legally purchased in this state if the bottles or containers are unopened and are being transported on state or federal highway.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-06; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 6; Laws, 1985, ch. 412; Laws, 1993, ch. 505, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 1993; Laws, 2018, ch. 385, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2018.

Amendment Notes —

The 2018 amendment, in (1), substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission” in the second sentence, and “department” for “commission” in the third sentence; and added (3).

Cross References —

Possession of alcoholic beverages, light wine and beer by person holding alcohol processing permit, see §67-9-1.

Exceptions to rules prohibiting alcoholic beverages, see §§97-31-23 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Interplay between Twenty-First Amendment and Commerce Clause concerning state regulation of intoxicating liquors. 116 A.L.R.5th 149.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 276 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 311 et seq., 380.

§ 67-1-10. Penalties for owning, controlling or possessing illegal distillery, or parts thereof; exceptions.

It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to own or control or have in such person’s, firm’s or corporation’s possession any distillery commonly called a still or any integral part thereof. It shall not be unlawful to own or have in possession a distillery or still in the following circumstances:

Where the same is used exclusively for the distillation of rosin products;

Where the same is used exclusively for the distillation of water;

Where the same is kept and lawfully used in any laboratory;

Where the same is in the possession of any officers of the law, to be disposed of according to law; or

Where the person or corporation can prove that the same is in his or their possession for the purpose of being delivered up to an officer of the law to be disposed of according to law. Any person guilty of violating this section shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction thereof shall be confined in the State Penitentiary not less than one (1) year, nor more than three (3) years for a first offense, and for a second offense he shall be confined in the State Penitentiary not less than five (5), nor more than ten (10) years.

HISTORY: Laws, 1993, ch. 505, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 1993.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors, §§ 14-86, 166-419.

10 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 151:1 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors, §§ 46-55, 60, 61.

§ 67-1-11. Local option election to render chapter effective in county.

  1. Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter, the legalizing provisions of this chapter, except as authorized under Section 67-9-1 and Section 67-1-7(2), shall not be effective, applicable or operative in any county unless and until a local option election shall be called and held in such county in the manner and with the results hereinafter provided.
  2. Upon presentation and filing of a proper petition requesting same signed by at least twenty percent (20%) or fifteen hundred (1,500), whichever number is the lesser, of the qualified electors of the county, it shall be the duty of the board of supervisors to call an election at which there shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the county the question of whether or not the sale, distribution and possession of alcoholic liquors shall be permitted in such county as provided in this chapter. Such election shall be held and conducted by the county election commissioners on a date fixed by the order of the board of supervisors, which date shall not be more than sixty (60) days from the date of the filing of said petition. Notice thereof shall be given by publishing such notice once each week for at least three (3) consecutive weeks in some newspaper published in said county or, if no newspaper be published therein, by such publication in a newspaper in an adjoining county and having a general circulation in the county involved. The election shall be held not earlier than fifteen (15) days from the first publication of such notice.
  3. Said election shall be held and conducted as far as may be possible in the same manner as is provided by law for the holding of general elections. The ballots used thereat shall contain a brief statement of the proposition submitted and, on separate lines, the words “I vote FOR coming out from under the dry law in_______________County ( )”“I vote AGAINST coming out from under the dry law in _______________County ( )” with appropriate boxes in which the voters may express their choice. All qualified electors may vote by marking the ballot with a cross (x) or check ( ) mark opposite the words of their choice.
  4. The election commissioners shall canvass and determine the results of said election, and shall certify same to the board of supervisors which shall adopt and spread upon its minutes an order declaring such results. If, in such election, a majority of the qualified electors participating therein shall vote in favor of the proposition, this chapter shall become applicable and operative in such county and the manufacture, sale, distribution and possession of alcoholic beverages therein shall be lawful to the extent and in the manner permitted hereby. If, on the other hand, a majority of the qualified electors participating in the election shall vote against the proposition, this chapter, except for Section 67-9-1 and 67-1-7(2), shall not become effective and operative in such county and, except as otherwise provided under Section 67-9-1 and 67-1-7(2), all laws prohibiting and regulating the manufacture, sale, distribution and possession of intoxicating liquor shall remain in full force and effect and be administered and vigorously prosecuted therein. In either case, no further election shall be held in said county under the provisions of this chapter for a period of two (2) years from the date of the prior election and then only upon the filing of a petition requesting same signed by at least twenty percent (20%) or fifteen hundred (1,500), whichever number is the lesser, of the qualified electors of the county as is otherwise provided herein.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-35; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 35; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 6; Laws, 2004, ch. 397, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 2004.

Amendment Notes —

The 2004 amendment inserted “and Section 67-1-7(2)” following “Section 67-9-1” in (1); and inserted “and 67-1-7(2)” following ‘Section 67-9-1” twice in (4).

Cross References —

Application of this section to the qualifications for a Class 1, temporary retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Temporary, one-day permit authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-51.

Local option relating to sale of beer and light wines, see §§67-3-7,67-3-9.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

No statute can be found prohibiting use of a single petition for both a referendum on alcoholic beverages under this section and for beer and light wine under §67-3-7. Lamar, Sept. 13, 2004, A.G. Op. 04-0478.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Change of “wet” or “dry” status fixed by local option election by change of name, character, or boundaries of voting unit, without later election. 25 A.L.R.2d 863.

Inclusion or exclusion of first and last days in computing time for giving notice of local option election which must be given a number of days before a known future date. 98 A.L.R.2d 1331.

Application of requirement that newspaper be locally published for official notice publication.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 55 et seq.

10 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 151:30 (petition for local option election).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 11-17 (petitions or applications in local option elections).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 92 et seq.

§ 67-1-13. Local option election to render chapter ineffective in county.

  1. When this chapter has been made effective and operative in any county as a result of an election called and held as provided in Section 67-1-11, the same may be made ineffective and inapplicable therein by an election called and held upon a petition filed with the board of supervisors requesting same signed by at least twenty percent (20%) or fifteen hundred (1500), whichever number is the lesser, of the qualified electors of the county as is otherwise provided in Section 67-1-11, all of the provisions of which shall be fully applicable thereto. However, nothing herein shall authorize or permit the calling and holding of any election under this chapter in any county more often than once every two (2) years. If in such election, a majority of the qualified electors participating therein shall vote against the legalized sale of intoxicating liquor, then the prohibition laws of the State of Mississippi, except as otherwise provided under Section 67-9-1 and 67-1-7(2), shall become applicable in said county.
  2. Notwithstanding an election reinstating the prohibition laws in a political subdivision, the holder of a native wine producer’s permit or a native wine retailer’s permit is allowed to continue to operate under such permits and to renew such permits. Possession of native wines and personal property related to the activities of the native wine permit holder which would otherwise be unlawful under prohibition shall be allowed subject to regulations of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-35; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 35; Laws, 1984, ch. 411; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 7; Laws, 2004, ch. 397, § 4, eff from and after July 1, 2004.

Amendment Notes —

The 2004 amendment inserted “and 67-1-7(2)” following “Section 67-9-1” in (1).

Cross References —

Native wine producer’s and retailer’s permits generally, see §67-1-51, §§67-5-1 et seq.

Local option relating to sale of beer and light wine, see §§67-3-7,67-3-9.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Change of “wet” or “dry” status fixed by local option election by change of name, character, or boundaries of voting unit, without later election. 25 A.L.R.2d 863.

Inclusion or exclusion of first and last days in computing time for giving notice of local option election which must be given a number of days before a known future date. 98 A.L.R.2d 1331.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 55 et seq.

10 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 151:30 (petition for local option election).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 11-17 (Petitions or applications in local option elections).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 91 et seq.

§ 67-1-14. Local option election to render chapter ineffective in certain municipalities.

[Effective until the date Laws of 2012, ch. 462 is effectuated under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended and extended, this section will read: ]

  1. The legalizing provisions of this chapter may be effective, applicable and operative in any municipality located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law if a local option election shall be called and held in such municipality in the manner and with the results hereinafter provided.
    1. Any municipality in this state having a population of not less than six thousand (6,000) according to the latest federal census, all or any portion of which is located within five (5) miles of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway and which is located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law, may, at an election held for the purpose under the election laws applicable to such municipality, either prohibit or permit, except as otherwise provided under Section 67-9-1, the sale, and the receipt, storage and transportation for the purpose of sale, of alcoholic beverages. An election to determine whether such sale and possession shall be permitted in municipalities wherein its sale and possession is prohibited by law shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities upon the presentation of a petition to such governing authorities containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such municipality asking for such election. In like manner, an election to determine whether such sale and possession shall be prohibited in municipalities wherein its sale is permitted by law shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities upon the presentation of a petition to such governing authorities containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such municipality asking for such election. No election on either question shall be held by any one (1) municipality more often than once in two (2) years.

      Thirty (30) days’ notice shall be given to the qualified electors of such municipality, in the manner prescribed by law, upon the question of either permitting or prohibiting such sale and possession, such notice to contain a statement of the question to be voted on at the election. The ballots to be used in the election shall have the following words printed thereon: “For the legal sale of alcoholic liquors,” and the words “Against the legal sale of alcoholic liquors” next below. In marking his ballot the voter shall make a cross (X) opposite the words of his choice.

      If in the election a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election shall vote “for the legal sale of alcoholic liquors,” then the municipal governing authorities shall pass the necessary order permitting the legal sale of such alcoholic beverages in such municipality. If in the election a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election shall vote “against the legal sale of alcoholic liquors,” then the municipal governing authorities shall pass the necessary order prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages in such municipality.

    2. The provisions of this subsection shall also apply to any municipality having a population of not less than six thousand (6,000) according to the latest federal census, a portion of which is located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law and a portion of which is located in a county which has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law. For the purpose of determining whether or not such a municipality meets the threshold population of six thousand (6,000) which will qualify the municipality to hold an election under this subsection, the entire population of the municipality shall be considered; however, the petition to hold the election authorized in this subsection shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities upon the presentation of a petition to such governing authorities containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such municipality who reside in that portion of the municipality located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law and the election shall be held only in that portion of the municipality. In all other respects, the authority for the holding of elections and the manner in which such elections shall be conducted shall be as prescribed in paragraph (a) of this subsection; and, after proper certification of election results, the municipal governing authorities shall pass the appropriate order to permit or prohibit the legal sale of alcoholic beverages in that portion of the municipality located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law.

HISTORY: Laws, 1990, ch. 569, § 1; Laws, 1993, ch. 445, § 1; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 8; Laws, 2012, ch. 462, § 1, eff (the date the United States Attorney General interposed no objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to the amendment of this section.).

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2012, ch. 462, §§ 2 and 3 provide:

“SECTION 2. The Attorney General of the State of Mississippi shall submit this act, immediately upon approval by the Governor, or upon approval by the Legislature subsequent to a veto, to the Attorney General of the United States or to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in accordance with the provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended and extended.

“SECTION 3. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after the date it is effectuated under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended and extended.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2012 amendment, in the first sentence of (2)(a), substituted ‘five thousand (5,000)‘ for ‘six thousand (6,000),‘ deleted ‘all or any portion of which is located within five (5) miles of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway‘ following ‘according to the latest federal census,‘ and added ‘or any municipality that is a county seat...out from under the dry law‘; and added (3).

Cross References —

Reannouncement of prohibition as law of state unless locally voted ineffective, see §67-1-3.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

For purpose of determining whether city’s population was sufficiently large to allow city to hold election on whether it could legalize use, possession, and sale of alcohol within city, federal census conducted ten years before election was the controlling census, rather than census that had just been conducted; results from census that had just been conducted were merely preliminary figures and had not yet been made final. Kelly v. City of Aberdeen, 680 So. 2d 208, 1996 Miss. LEXIS 487 (Miss. 1996).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Propriety of using census data as basis for governmental regulations or activities – state cases. 56 A.L.R.5th 1.

Am. Jur.

10 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 151:30 (petition for local option election).

§ 67-1-14. Local option election to render chapter ineffective in certain municipalities.

[Effective from and after the date Laws of 2012, ch. 462 is effectuated under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended and extended, this section will read:]

  1. The legalizing provisions of this chapter may be effective, applicable and operative in any municipality located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law if a local option election shall be called and held in such municipality in the manner and with the results hereinafter provided.
    1. Any municipality in this state having a population of not less than five thousand (5,000) according to the latest federal census and which is located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law, or any municipality that is a county seat and which is located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law, may, at an election held for the purpose under the election laws applicable to such municipality, either prohibit or permit, except as otherwise provided under Section 67-9-1, the sale, and the receipt, storage and transportation for the purpose of sale, of alcoholic beverages. An election to determine whether such sale and possession shall be permitted in municipalities wherein its sale and possession is prohibited by law shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities upon the presentation of a petition to such governing authorities containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such municipality asking for such election. In like manner, an election to determine whether such sale and possession shall be prohibited in municipalities wherein its sale is permitted by law shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities upon the presentation of a petition to such governing authorities containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such municipality asking for such election. No election on either question shall be held by any one (1) municipality more often than once in two (2) years.

      Thirty (30) days’ notice shall be given to the qualified electors of such municipality, in the manner prescribed by law, upon the question of either permitting or prohibiting such sale and possession, such notice to contain a statement of the question to be voted on at the election. The ballots to be used in the election shall have the following words printed thereon: “For the legal sale of alcoholic liquors” and the words “Against the legal sale of alcoholic liquors” next below. In marking his ballot the voter shall make a cross (X) opposite the words of his choice.

      If in the election a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election shall vote “for the legal sale of alcoholic liquors,” then the municipal governing authorities shall pass the necessary order permitting the legal sale of such alcoholic beverages in such municipality. If in the election a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election shall vote “against the legal sale of alcoholic liquors,” then the municipal governing authorities shall pass the necessary order prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages in such municipality.

    2. The provisions of this subsection shall also apply to any municipality having a population of not less than six thousand (6,000) according to the latest federal census, a portion of which is located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law and a portion of which is located in a county which has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law. For the purpose of determining whether or not such a municipality meets the threshold population of six thousand (6,000) which will qualify the municipality to hold an election under this subsection, the entire population of the municipality shall be considered; however, the petition to hold the election authorized in this subsection shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities upon the presentation of a petition to such governing authorities containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such municipality who reside in that portion of the municipality located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law and the election shall be held only in that portion of the municipality. In all other respects, the authority for the holding of elections and the manner in which such elections shall be conducted shall be as prescribed in paragraph (a) of this subsection; and, after proper certification of election results, the municipal governing authorities shall pass the appropriate order to permit or prohibit the legal sale of alcoholic beverages in that portion of the municipality located in a county which has voted against coming out from under the dry law.
  2. The governing authorities of a municipality that has voted to come out from under the dry laws after the effective date of this act may, by ordinance, provide that alcoholic beverages may be sold in the municipality only by the holder of an on-premises retailer’s permit.

HISTORY: Laws, 1990, ch. 569, § 1; Laws, 1993, ch. 445, § 1; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 8; Laws, 2012, ch. 462, § 1, eff (the date the United States Attorney General interposed no objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to the amendment of this section.).

§ 67-1-15. Local option elections in counties having two judicial districts.

In any county having two judicial districts, each such judicial district shall be construed to be a political subdivision or subdivision of government on the same basis as a county, and as such, a judicial district will be entitled to all of the rights, privileges, and immunities as a county for the purposes of authorizing the sale of intoxicating liquor therein under the provisions of this chapter.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-35; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 35, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

Cross References —

Elections to permit sale of beer and light wine, see §§67-3-7,67-3-9.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Change of “wet” or “dry” status fixed by local option election by change of name, character, or boundaries of voting unit, without later election. 25 A.L.R.2d 863.

Inclusion or exclusion of first and last days in computing time for giving notice of local option election which must be given a number of days before a known future date. 98 A.L.R.2d 1331.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 55 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors § 93.

§ 67-1-16. Election on question of whether qualified resort to be allowed in municipality; designation of municipality as qualified resort area; county election on question of whether area should be qualified resort area.

    1. Before an area may be designated by the governing authorities of a municipality as an area in which facilities which are defined as qualified resort areas in Section 67-1-5(o)(iii)5 may be located, an election shall be held, under the election laws applicable to the municipality, on the question of whether qualified resort areas shall be allowed in the municipality. An election to determine whether qualified resort areas shall be allowed in the municipality shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities, upon presentation to the governing authorities of a petition containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of the municipality asking for the election. An election on the question may not be held by the municipality more often than once each year.
    2. Thirty (30) days’ notice shall be given to the qualified electors of the municipality, in the manner prescribed by law, on the question of allowing qualified resort areas to be established. The notice shall contain a statement of the question to be voted on at the election. The ballots used in the election shall have the following words printed thereon: “FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF QUALIFIED RESORT AREAS,” and next below, “AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF QUALIFIED RESORT AREAS.” In marking his ballot, the voter shall make a cross (X) opposite the words of his choice.
    3. Qualified resort areas may be established if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote for such establishment. A qualified resort area may not be established if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote against such establishment.
    1. Before a municipality may be designated as a qualified resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5(o)(iii)6, an election shall be held, under the election laws applicable to the municipality, on the question of whether the municipality shall be a qualified resort area. An election to determine whether the municipality shall be a qualified resort area shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities, upon presentation to the governing authorities of a petition containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of the municipality asking for the election. An election on the question may not be held by the municipality more often than once each year.
    2. Thirty (30) days’ notice shall be given to the qualified electors of the municipality, in the manner prescribed by law, on the question of allowing qualified resort areas to be established. The notice shall contain a statement of the question to be voted on at the election. The ballots used in the election shall have the following words printed thereon: “FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUALIFIED RESORT AREA,” and next below, “AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUALIFIED RESORT AREA.” In marking his ballot, the voter shall make a cross (X) opposite the words of his choice.
    3. The municipality may be established as a qualified resort area if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote for such establishment. A qualified resort area may not be established if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote against such establishment.
    1. Before an area may be designated a qualified resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5(o)(iii)7, an election shall be held in the municipality in which the area is located under the election laws applicable to the municipality, on the question of whether the area shall be a qualified resort area. An election to determine whether the area shall be a qualified resort area shall be ordered by the municipal governing authorities, upon presentation to the governing authorities of a petition containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of the municipality asking for the election. An election on the question may not be held by the municipality more often than once each year.
    2. Thirty (30) days’ notice shall be given to the qualified electors of the municipality, in the manner prescribed by law, on the question of allowing qualified resort areas to be established. The notice shall contain a statement of the question to be voted on at the election. The ballots used in the election shall have the following words printed thereon: “FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUALIFIED RESORT AREA,” and next below, “AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUALIFIED RESORT AREA.” In marking his ballot, the voter shall make a cross (X) opposite the words of his choice.
    3. The area may be established as a qualified resort area if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote for such establishment. A qualified resort area may not be established if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote against such establishment.
    1. Before an area may be designated a qualified resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5(o)(iii)8, an election shall be held in the area described in Section 67-1-5(o)(iii)8 under the election laws applicable to counties, on the question of whether the area shall be a qualified resort area. An election to determine whether the area shall be a qualified resort area shall be ordered by the board of supervisors, upon presentation to the board of a petition containing the names of at least twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of the area described in Section 67-1-5(o)(iii)8 asking for the election. An election on the question may not be held by the county more often than once each year.
    2. Thirty (30) days’ notice shall be given to the qualified electors of the area, in the manner prescribed by law, on the question of allowing qualified resort areas to be established. The notice shall contain a statement of the question to be voted on at the election. The ballots used in the election shall have the following words printed thereon: “FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUALIFIED RESORT AREA,” and next below, “AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUALIFIED RESORT AREA.” In marking his ballot, the voter shall make a cross (X) opposite the words of his choice.
    3. The area may be established as a qualified resort area if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote for such establishment. A qualified resort area may not be established if a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election vote against such establishment.

HISTORY: Laws, 2009, ch. 558, § 2, eff May 26, 2009 (the date the United States Attorney General interposed no objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to the addition of this section); Laws, 2014, ch. 346, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2014.

Editor’s Notes —

On May 26, 2009, the United States Attorney General interposed no objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to the addition of this section by Laws of 2009, ch. 558.

Amendment Notes —

The 2014 amendment added (4).

§ 67-1-17. Unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages; seizure and sale.

  1. It shall be unlawful for any person to have or possess either alcoholic beverages or personal property intended for use in violating the provisions of this chapter, or regulations prescribed under this chapter, or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972. No property rights shall exist in any such personal property or alcoholic beverages. All such personal property and alcoholic beverages shall be considered contraband and shall be seized and forfeited to the state of Mississippi.
  2. The following are subject to forfeiture:
    1. All alcoholic beverages which have been manufactured, distilled, distributed, dispensed or acquired in violation of this chapter or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972;
    2. All raw materials, products and equipment of any kind which are used, or intended for use, in manufacturing, compounding, processing, delivering, importing or exporting any alcoholic beverage in violation of this chapter or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972;
    3. All property which is used, or intended for use, as a container for property described in items (a) or (b) of this subsection;
    4. All conveyances, including aircraft, vehicles or vessels, which are used, or intended for use, to transport, or in any manner to facilitate the transportation, for the purpose of sale or receipt, possession or concealment, of property described in item (a) of this subsection which is in excess of six (6) gallons or of property described in item (b) of this subsection; however,
      1. No conveyance used by any person as a common carrier in the transaction of business as a common carrier is subject to forfeiture under this section unless it appears that the owner or other person in charge of the conveyance is a consenting party or privy to a violation of this chapter or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972;
      2. No conveyance is subject to forfeiture under this section by reason of any act or omission proved by the owner thereof to have been committed or omitted without his knowledge or consent; if the confiscating authority has reason to believe that the conveyance is a leased or rented conveyance, then the confiscating authority shall notify the owner of the conveyance within five (5) days of the confiscation; and
      3. A forfeiture of a conveyance encumbered by a bona fide security interest is subject to the interest of the secured party if he neither had knowledge of nor consented to the act or omission;
    5. All money, deadly weapons, books, records and research products and materials, including formulas, microfilm, tapes and data which are used, or intended for use, in violation of this chapter or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972.
  3. Property subject to forfeiture may be seized by the alcoholic beverage control division and its agents, local law enforcement officers, Mississippi Highway Patrol officers and other law enforcement personnel charged by Section 67-1-91, with enforcing the provisions of this chapter upon process issued by any appropriate court having jurisdiction over the property. Seizure without process may be made if:
    1. The Seizure is incident to an arrest or a search under a search warrant or an administrative inspection under Section 67-1-37(k);
    2. The property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding based upon this chapter or Chapter 31 of Article 97, Mississippi Code of 1972; or
    3. The alcoholic beverage control division of the state tax commission and other law enforcement personnel described in this subsection have probable cause to believe that the property was used or is intended to be used in violation of this chapter or Chapter 31 of Article 97, Mississippi Code of 1972.
  4. Alcoholic beverages and raw materials seized or detained under the authority of this chapter or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972, is deemed to be in the custody of the agent or agency so seizing the property and subject only to the orders and decrees of the court having jurisdiction over the property. When such property is seized it may be retained as evidence until final disposition of the cause in which such property is involved, and then the agent or agency so seizing the property shall physically transfer such alcoholic beverage or raw material to the director of the alcoholic beverage control division of the state tax commission together with an appropriate inventory of the items seized. Alcoholic beverages and raw materials seized or detained under the authority of this section shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Section 67-1-18.
  5. Any property other than alcoholic beverages and raw materials seized or detained pursuant to this chapter or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972, shall be deemed to be in the custody of the agent or agency so seizing the property and subject only to the orders and decrees of the court having jurisdiction over the property. When such property is seized it may be retained as evidence until the final disposition of the cause in which such property is involved. Property seized or detained other than alcoholic beverages or raw materials shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Sections 67-1-93, 67-1-95 and 67-1-97.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-07; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 7; Laws, 1971, ch. 347, § 1; Laws, 1984, ch. 424, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved April 23, 1984).

Cross References —

Mississippi State Tax Commission, generally, see §§27-3-1 et seq.

Disposal of seized property by Mississippi State Tax Commission, see §67-1-18.

Authority of agents and inspectors of Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission, see §67-1-31.

Penalty for possession of light wine and beer in dry counties, see §67-3-13.

Criminal offenses involving intoxicating beverages, see §§97-31-5 et seq.

Search warrants and requirements therefor, see §§99-27-15 through99-27-19.

Seizure and destruction of intoxicating liquors, see §99-27-11.

Jurisdiction over and interposition of claim to possession of seized intoxicating liquors, see §99-27-13.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Sections 67-1-17, 67-1-93, 67-1-95 and 67-1-97, which govern the seizure and disposal of personal property which is in violation of the prohibition law, do not provide for the return of the property prior to a hearing on the forfeiture proceeding. Thus, a defendant was not entitled to the return of her seized car pending the outcome of the forfeiture hearing where the defendant admitted that the intoxicating liquors being transported in her automobile belonged to her, and that she was in the vehicle and was participating in the actual transportation of the contraband. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. One (1) 1984 Black Mercury Grand Marquis, 568 So. 2d 707, 1990 Miss. LEXIS 564 (Miss. 1990).

Forfeiture applies when the prohibition law is violated using a vehicle for concealing or transporting of liquor in excess of 6 gallons; the burden is upon the State to prove that the forfeiture comes within the statute imposing liability by a preponderance of the evidence. Thus, an automobile which was used by the defendant to transport more than 6 gallons of intoxicating liquor into a “dry” county, was subject to forfeiture following the defendant’s conviction for unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor in violation of §97-31-27. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. One (1) 1984 Black Mercury Grand Marquis, 568 So. 2d 707, 1990 Miss. LEXIS 564 (Miss. 1990).

Section67-1-17, providing for the seizure of unlawful alcoholic beverages, violates federal due process requirements by failing to provide for reasonable notice to the owner of a seized vehicle prior to its forfeiture. However, notice to the owner of a seized vehicle advising him of the pendency of a subsequent forfeiture proceeding, provided by §99-27-11, and the owner’s opportunity to interpose a claim to the seized property prior to its forfeiture, provided by §99-27-13, satisfy due process notice and hearing requirements. Holladay v. Roberts, 425 F. Supp. 61, 1977 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18048 (N.D. Miss. 1977).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Forfeiture of property for unlawful use before trial of individual offender. 3 A.L.R.2d 738.

Lawfulness of seizure of property used in violation of law as prerequisite to forfeiture action or proceeding. 8 A.L.R.3d 473.

Relief to owner of motor vehicle subject to state forfeiture for use in violation of narcotics laws. 50 A.L.R.3d 172.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 14, 276, 396 et seq.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 141-145 (seizure and forfeiture of intoxicating liquors).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 53 et seq., 361-368.

48A C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 553 et seq.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

Payne, An introduction to civil forfeiture in Mississippi: An effective law enforcement tool or cash register justice? 59 Miss. L. J. 453, Fall 1989.

§ 67-1-18. Disposal of seized property by Department of Revenue.

  1. Any alcoholic beverage, light wine, beer or raw material seized under the authority of this chapter, Chapter 3 of Title 67, or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972, shall be submitted to the custody of the Mississippi Department of Revenue for disposition.
    1. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the department shall not dispose of any alcoholic beverage, light wine, beer or raw material without first providing reasonable notice to all individuals having an interest in the property and an opportunity for them to appear and establish their right or claim to the property. If no hearing is requested by the passage of the appropriate deadline, the department shall require the alcoholic beverages, light wine, beer or raw materials to be sold for the benefit of the state or destroyed.
    2. The provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection shall not apply in cases in which the owner or possessor of the alcoholic beverage, light wine, beer or raw material is convicted of possession of alcoholic beverages, beer or light wine in a location in which such possession is prohibited by law, or convicted of a violation of Section 67-1-81(2) or 67-3-70. In such cases, the alcoholic beverage, light wine, beer or raw materials seized in connection with the violation may be disposed of in the manner prescribed by the department.
    1. If the department orders the property, other than alcoholic beverages, sold, then the property shall be sold to the highest bidder, the bidder being any person, firm or government agency. The offer for sale shall be made to not less than three (3) qualified prospective buyers, by mailing them an invitation to bid, which shall describe the property, terms of sale, method of delivery, manner of bidding and fixing a time of not more than fifteen (15) days from the date of invitation for opening of bids received by the department.
    2. All bids and payment shall be made in the manner as prescribed by the department. Bids, after opening, shall be subject to public inspection.
  2. If the department orders the sale of seized alcoholic beverages, it may place the alcoholic beverages in the state inventory to be sold to authorized retailers in the same manner as other alcoholic beverages in the state inventory are sold.
  3. Any appeal from a seizure and disposal made under this section shall be made pursuant to Section 67-1-72.

HISTORY: Laws, 1984, ch. 424, § 2; Laws, 2015, ch. 438, § 2; Laws, 2016, ch. 470, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2016.

Amendment Notes —

The 2015 amendment inserted subsection designations and added (5); substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission” in (1) and substituted “department” for “commission” throughout the section; inserted “light wine, beer” in (1) and twice in (2); inserted “Chapter 3 of Title 67” in (1); substituted “If no appeal is requested by the passage of the appropriate deadline” for “Upon hearing the evidence” and deleted “released to an interested party” preceding “sold for the benefit” in the second sentence of (2); and made stylistic changes.

The 2016 amendment, in (2), in the first sentence of (a), added the exception at the beginning and substituted “first providing reasonable” for “first having a hearing with reasonable,” and in the last sentence, substituted “hearing is requested” for “appeal is requested”; and added (b).

Cross References —

Mississippi Department of Revenue generally, see §§27-3-1 et seq.

Seizure and disposal of alcoholic beverages and raw materials and retention for use as evidence, see §67-1-17.

Sale of forfeited property other than alcoholic beverages or raw materials at public auction, see §67-1-97.

Criminal offenses involving intoxicating beverages, see §§97-31-5 et seq.

Seizure and destruction of intoxicating liquors, see §99-27-11.

Interposition of claim to possession of seized intoxicating liquors and jurisdiction thereover, see §99-27-13.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Lawfulness of seizure of property used in violation of law as prerequisite to forfeiture action or proceeding. 8 A.L.R.3d 473.

Relief to owner of motor vehicle subject to state forfeiture for use in violation of narcotics laws. 50 A.L.R.3d 172.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 14 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 53 et seq.

§ 67-1-19. Administration of chapter.

The administration and enforcement of this chapter shall be vested in the Department of Revenue. There is hereby created the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division within and as a part of the Department of Revenue.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-08; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 8; Laws, 1980, ch. 561, § 13; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 127, eff from and after July 1, 2010.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, substituted “Department of Revenue” for “state tax commission” both times it appears; and deleted “except as provided in Section 67-1-23” from the end of the first sentence.

Cross References —

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

The Eleventh Amendment barred a federal courts suit for damages against the alcoholic beverage control division, a non-autonomous part of the state tax commission, pursuant to §67-1-19, where any damages awarded against the commission or the alcoholic beverage control division necessarily would be payable from the state treasury. Holladay v. Roberts, 425 F. Supp. 61, 1977 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18048 (N.D. Miss. 1977).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Immunity from suit of governmental liquor control agency. 9 A.L.R.2d 1292.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 14 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 46 et seq., 360.

§ 67-1-21. Repealed.

Repealed by Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 143, effective from and after July 1, 2010.

§67-1-21. [Codes 1942, § 10265-09; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 9, eff from and after July 1, 1966.]

Editor’s Notes —

Former §67-1-21 provided the duties of the secretary of the commission.

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 143, effective from and after July 1, 2010, provides:

“SECTION 143. Sections 27-3-11, 27-3-21, 27-3-25, 27-3-27, 27-3-32, 27-3-55, 27-3-75, and 67-1-21, Mississippi Code of 1972, are repealed.”

§ 67-1-23. Appointment of division personnel; oath.

The Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue shall appoint a director of the division, and may appoint or employ such agents, inspectors, clerks and other employees for such division as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter or to perform the duties and exercise the powers conferred by this chapter upon the department. The Commissioner of Revenue shall have the authority to employ, compensate, terminate, suspend with or without pay, promote, demote, transfer or reprimand the director, agents, inspectors, clerks and other employees of the division. The director and all permanent employees of the division shall devote their full time to the duties of their respective offices.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-10; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 10; Laws, 1980, ch. 561, § 14; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 128, eff from and after July 1, 2010.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, in the first sentence, substituted “Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue” for “chairman of the commission” and “department” for “commission”; substituted “Commissioner of Revenue” for “chairman of the State Tax Commission” in the second sentence; and deleted the former next-to-last sentence, which read: “The director, and each agent, inspector, clerk and all other employees of the division shall, before entering upon the duties of his office, take and subscribe to an oath of office.”

Cross References —

Administration and enforcement of the local option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law by the State Tax Commission, see §27-3-31.

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Commissioner of revenue of the department of revenue, see §§27-3-3,27-3-4.

§ 67-1-25. Qualifications of personnel.

No person shall be appointed director, agent or inspector for the commission under this chapter who is not a citizen of the United States. No director, agent, inspector or other employee shall be appointed under this chapter who has been convicted of any violation of any federal or state law concerning the manufacture, sale or possession of alcoholic liquor prior or subsequent to July 1, 1966, or who has paid a fine or penalty in settlement of any prosecution against him for any violation of such laws or shall have forfeited his bond to appear in court to answer charges for any such violation, nor shall any person be so appointed who has been convicted of a felony in any state or federal court. No person appointed or employed by the commission under this chapter may, directly or indirectly, individually or as a member of a partnership or limited liability company, or as a shareholder of a corporation, have any interest whatsoever in the manufacture, sale or distribution of alcoholic liquor, or receive any compensation or profit therefrom, or have any interest whatsoever in the purchases or sales made by the persons authorized by this chapter to purchase or to sell alcoholic liquor.

This section shall not prevent any person appointed or employed by the commission from purchasing and keeping in his possession for the use of himself or members of his family or guests any alcoholic liquor which may be purchased or kept by any other person by virtue of this chapter.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-12; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 12; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 8; Laws, 2007, ch. 462, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved Mar. 26, 2007.).

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment inserted “or limited liability company” following “member of a partnership” in the last sentence of the first paragraph.

The 2007 amendment deleted “and who has not resided within the State of Mississippi successively for five (5) years next preceding the date of his appointment” following “United States” from the end of the first sentence in the first paragraph.

§ 67-1-27. Bonds of personnel.

Before entering into the duties of his office, the director, and such other agents, inspectors and employees appointed under the provisions of this chapter as the commission shall designate, shall give surety bond, with some company authorized to do business in the State of Mississippi and approved by the State Insurance Commissioner, appearing thereon as surety, in a sum of not less than five thousand dollars, conditioned upon the faithful performance of their duties. The premiums for such bonds shall be paid out of funds appropriated for the support of the commission.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-14; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 14, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

§ 67-1-29. Compensation of personnel.

The director, secretary, agents, inspectors, clerks and employees of the commission appointed under this chapter shall receive such reasonable compensation as may be fixed by the commission. The director and all agents, inspectors, clerks, and other employees shall be reimbursed for all actual and necessary traveling and other expenses and disbursements incurred or made by them in the discharge of their official duties. Such compensation and expenses shall be paid from funds appropriated for the support of the commission.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-15; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 15, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

§ 67-1-31. Law enforcement authority of agents and inspectors; liability of members of commission for acts or omissions of agents or inspectors.

The commission shall issue to all agents and inspectors appointed under this chapter a written certificate of appointment under the seal of said commission, of which judicial notice shall be taken by all courts of this state. Such agents and inspectors are hereby declared to be police officers in enforcing the provisions of this chapter, and in the performance of their duties such employees shall have the authority to bear arms, to make arrests, to make searches and seizures under this chapter, and to serve any protest, notice or order connected with the enforcement of this chapter by whatever officer or authority of court issued. The members of the commission shall not be personally liable to any person on account of any act, neglect or omission of any such agent or inspector.

The powers and duties of the agents and inspectors shall include, in addition to all others prescribed by law the following powers: to arrest, without warrant, any person committing or attempting to commit a misdemeanor, felony or a breach of the peace within his presence or view, and to pursue and so arrest any person committing such an offense to and at any place in the state where the person may go or be; and to aid and assist any law enforcement officer, if requested. Nothing herein shall be construed as granting agents and inspectors of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the State Tax Commission general police powers.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-11; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 11; Laws, 1982, ch. 384; Laws, 1995, ch. 350, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved March 14, 1995).

Cross References —

Agent’s custody of alcoholic beverages and raw materials seized for violation of alcoholic beverages control law, see §67-1-17.

Other persons authorized to carry weapons, see §§97-37-7,97-37-9.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

An agent of the alcoholic beverage control division did not have authority to serve a search warrant issued for the purpose of making a search for illegal gambling equipment, since such agents have no police powers other than those expressly granted by the provisions of the local option alcoholic beverage control law. Presley v. State, 229 So. 2d 830, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1259 (Miss. 1969).

Inasmuch as Code 1942, § 10265-05 excludes from the definition of “alcoholic beverage” beer and wine of not more than 4 percent of alcohol by weight the authority conferred upon agents of the alcoholic beverage commission under this section and Code 1942, § 10265-17 does not authorize and empower them to check a retailer’s beer license to see whether it was in date or to inspect beer stock to determine whether it was Mississippi-taxed beer. Jolliff v. State, 215 So. 2d 234, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1338 (Miss. 1968), overruled, Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982), but see Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

The law enforcement authority of the agents and inspectors of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the State Tax Commission is limited to the authority set forth in Section 67-1-31, which includes the authority to aid and assist any law enforcement officer, if requested. Carter, December 13, 1996, A.G. Op. #96-0852.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

What circumstances fall within “inevitable discovery” exception to rule precluding admission, in criminal case, of evidence obtained in violation of Federal Constitution. 81 A.L.R. Fed. 331.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 377 et seq.

CJS.

48A C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 551 et seq.

§ 67-1-33. Gratuities and gifts to members of the Board of Tax Appeals, Commissioner of Revenue of Department of Revenue or Department of Revenue and employees prohibited.

  1. No member of the Board of Tax Appeals, Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue, or person appointed or employed by the department under this chapter shall solicit, accept or receive any gift, gratuity, emolument or employment from any person subject to the provisions of this chapter, or from any officer, agent or employee thereof.
  2. No member of the Board of Tax Appeals, the Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue, or person appointed or employed by the department under this chapter shall solicit, request from or recommend, directly or indirectly, to any person subject to the provisions of this chapter, or to any officer, agent or employee thereof, the appointment of any person to any place or position.
  3. Every person subject to the provisions of this chapter, and every officer, agent or employee thereof, is hereby forbidden to offer to any member of the Board of Tax Appeals, to the Commissioner of Revenue or to any person appointed or employed by the department under this chapter any gift, gratuity, emolument or employment.
  4. If any member of the Board of Tax Appeals, the Commissioner of Revenue or any person appointed or employed by the department under this chapter shall violate any of the provisions of this section, he shall be removed from the office or employment held by him.
  5. Every person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
  6. For purposes of this provision, the terms “gift,” “gratuity,” “emolument” and “employment” do not include the payment of expenses associated with social occasions afforded public servants or any other benefit that does not come within the definition of “pecuniary benefit” as defined in Section 25-4-103.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-13; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 13; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 129, eff from and after July 1, 2010.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, rewrote the section to define certain terms with regard to prohibitions in the local option law regarding officers and employees of the department of revenue.

Cross References —

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Commissioner of revenue of the department of revenue, see §§27-3-3,27-3-4.

Board of tax appeals, see §27-4-1 et seq.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Criminal offense of bribery as affected by lack of authority of state public officer or employee. 73 A.L.R.3d 374.

§ 67-1-35. Official seal of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the Department of Revenue.

The department may, for authentication of records, process and proceedings, adopt, keep and use a seal for the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the Department of Revenue, of which seal judicial notice shall be taken in all courts of this state. Any process, notice or other paper which the department may be authorized by law to issue under this chapter shall be deemed sufficient if signed by the director and authenticated by such seal. All acts, orders, proceedings, rules, regulations, entries, minutes, and other records of the department in connection with this chapter, and all reports and documents filed with it under this chapter, may be proved in any court of this state by a copy thereof certified to by the director with the seal of the division affixed.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-16; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 16; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 130, eff from and after July 1, 2010.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, deleted the former first two sentences, which read: “The main office of the alcoholic beverage control division of the state tax commission shall be in the City of Jackson, but the commission may establish and maintain branch offices of the division at places other than the seat of government. The commission shall hold such meetings in connection with the enforcement and administration of this chapter as it may deem necessary at any time and at any place within the state”; substituted “department” for “commission” and “Department of Revenue” for “state tax commission” everywhere they appear; and made minor stylistic changes.

Cross References —

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Powers and duties of the department of revenue with respect to the alcoholic beverage control division of the department of revenue, see §67-1-37.

§ 67-1-37. Powers and duties of Department of Revenue with respect to Alcoholic Beverage Control Division.

  1. The Department of Revenue, under its duties and powers with respect to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division therein, shall have the following powers, functions and duties:
    1. To issue or refuse to issue any permit provided for by this chapter, or to extend the permit or remit in whole or any part of the permit monies when the permit cannot be used due to a natural disaster or act of God.
    2. To revoke, suspend or cancel, for violation of or noncompliance with the provisions of this chapter, or the law governing the production and sale of native wines, or any lawful rules and regulations of the department issued hereunder, or for other sufficient cause, any permit issued by it under the provisions of this chapter. The department shall also be authorized to suspend the permit of any permit holder for being out of compliance with an order for support, as defined in Section 93-11-153. The procedure for suspension of a permit for being out of compliance with an order for support, and the procedure for the reissuance or reinstatement of a permit suspended for that purpose, and the payment of any fees for the reissuance or reinstatement of a permit suspended for that purpose, shall be governed by Section 93-11-157 or Section 93-11-163, as the case may be. If there is any conflict between any provision of Section 93-11-157 or Section 93-11-163 and any provision of this chapter, the provisions of Section 93-11-157 or Section 93-11-163, as the case may be, shall control.
    3. To prescribe forms of permits and applications for permits and of all reports which it deems necessary in administering this chapter.
    4. To fix standards, not in conflict with those prescribed by any law of this state or of the United States, to secure the use of proper ingredients and methods of manufacture of alcoholic beverages.
    5. To issue rules regulating the advertising of alcoholic beverages in the state in any class of media and permitting advertising of the retail price of alcoholic beverages.
    6. To issue reasonable rules and regulations, not inconsistent with the federal laws or regulations, requiring informative labeling of all alcoholic beverages offered for sale within this state and providing for the standards of fill and shapes of retail containers of alcoholic beverages; however, such containers shall not contain less than fifty (50) milliliters by liquid measure.
    7. Subject to the provisions of subsection (3) of Section 67-1-51, to issue rules and regulations governing the issuance of retail permits for premises located near or around schools, colleges, universities, churches and other public institutions, and specifying the distances therefrom within which no such permit shall be issued. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Division shall not issue a package retailer’s or on-premises retailer’s permit for the sale or consumption of alcoholic beverages in or on the campus of any public school, community or junior college, college or university.
    8. To adopt and promulgate, repeal and amend, such rules, regulations, standards, requirements and orders, not inconsistent with this chapter or any law of this state or of the United States, as it deems necessary to control the manufacture, importation, transportation, distribution and sale of alcoholic liquor, whether intended for beverage or nonbeverage use in a manner not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter or any other statute, including the native wine laws.
    9. To call upon other administrative departments of the state, county and municipal governments, county and city police departments and upon prosecuting officers for such information and assistance as it may deem necessary in the performance of its duties.
    10. To prepare and submit to the Governor during the month of January of each year a detailed report of its official acts during the preceding fiscal year ending June 30, including such recommendations as it may see fit to make, and to transmit a like report to each member of the Legislature of this state upon the convening thereof at its next regular session.
    11. To inspect, or cause to be inspected, any premises where alcoholic liquors intended for sale are manufactured, stored, distributed or sold, and to examine or cause to be examined all books and records pertaining to the business conducted therein.
    12. To investigate the administration of laws in relation to alcoholic liquors in this and other states and any foreign countries, and to recommend from time to time to the Governor and through him to the Legislature of this state such amendments to this chapter, if any, as it may think desirable.
    13. To designate hours and days when alcoholic beverages may be sold in different localities in the state which permit such sale.
    14. To assign employees to posts of duty at locations where they will be most beneficial for the control of alcoholic beverages and to take any other action concerning persons employed under this chapter as authorized by law and taken in accordance with the rules, regulations and procedures of the State Personnel Board.
    15. To enforce the provisions made unlawful by Chapter 3, Title 67 and Section 97-5-49.
    16. To delegate its authority under this chapter to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division, its director or any other officer or employee of the department that it deems appropriate.
  2. No alcoholic beverage shall be sold or consumed at any public athletic event at any public school, community or junior college, college or university.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-17; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 17; Laws, 1970, ch. 549, § 1; Laws, 1971, ch. 358, § 1; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 14; Laws, 1988, ch. 383, § 1; Laws, 1988, ch. 562, § 1; Laws, 1992, ch. 459, § 1; Laws, 1996, ch. 507, § 15; Laws, 1997, ch. 558, § 2; reenacted and amended, Laws, 1998, ch. 520, § 1; Laws, 2002, ch. 570, § 6; Laws, 2003, ch. 392, § 1; Laws, 2005, ch. 462, § 1; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 3; Laws, 2007, ch. 462, § 3; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 131; Laws, 2011, ch. 379, § 1; Laws, 2016, ch. 470, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2016.

Editor’s Notes —

For provisions of this section in effect from and after July 1, 1988, until January 1, 1989, see Laws, 1988, ch. 562, § 1.

Laws of 1998, ch. 520, § 5, provides as follows:

“SECTION 5. Section 5, Chapter 558, Laws of 1997, which repeals, effective July 1, 1998, Sections 67-1-37, 67-3-31, 67-3-37 and 67-3-75, Mississippi Code of 1972, is repealed.”

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2003 amendment substituted “July 1, 2005” for “July 1, 2003” in the bracketed language appearing at the beginning of each version of the section.

The 2005 amendment extended the repeal date of the first version from “July 1, 2005” until “July 1, 2007”; and extended the effective date of the second version from “July 1, 2005” until “July 1, 2007.”

The 2006 amendment deleted former (q), which read “To adopt and promulgate rules and regulations for suspension or revocation of identification cards of employees of permittees for violations of the alcoholic beverage control laws, rules or regulations” in both versions of the section; and in the first version, effective until July 1, 2007, redesignated former (r) to be present (q).

The 2007 amendment, in both versions of the section, substituted “2011” for “2007” in the bracketed effective date language, added (2) and redesignated the former undesignated introductory language as present (1), made minor stylistic changes, and in (1)(g), substituted “shall not issue a package retailer’s or on-premises retailer’s permit for the sale” for “shall not allow the sale” and “public school, community or junior college, college or university” for “public school or college, and no alcoholic beverage shall be for sale or consumed at any public athletic event at any grammar or high school or any college”; and in the version effective until July 1, 2011, inserted “67-3-57” in (1)(q).

The 2009 amendment, in both the version effective from and after July 1, 2010, and until July 1, 2011, and the version effective from and after July 1, 2011, substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission” in the introductory language of (1); in (1)(b), in the first sentence, substituted “department” for “commission,” and deleted “however, no such permit shall be revoked, suspended or cancelled except after a hearing of which the permit holder shall have been given reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard” from the end, and substituted “The department shall also be authorized” for “The board shall be authorized” in the second sentence; deleted former (l), and redesignated former (m) through (o) as present (l) through (n); in addition, in the version effective from and after July 1, 2010, and until July 1, 2011, deleted former (p), redesignated former (q) as present (o), and added (p); and in the version effective from and after July 1, 2011, deleted former (p), and added present (o).

The 2011 amendment deleted the version effective from and after July 1, 2011.

The 2016 amendment substituted “unlawful by Chapter 3, Title 67 and Section 97-5-49” for “unlawful by Sections 67-3-13, 67-3-15, 67-3-53, 67-3-57, and 67-3-70” in (1)(o).

Cross References —

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Annual privilege taxes for permits, see §27-71-5.

Seizure without process of property subject to forfeiture because of unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

Alcoholic beverage permits, generally, see §§67-1-51 et seq.

Application of this section to the qualifications for a Class 1 or Class 2 Temporary retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Temporary, one-day permit authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-51.

Temporary permit for those seeking to transfer either a package retailer’s permit or an on-premises retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Sales after hours, see §67-3-53.

Native Wines Law, see §§67-5-1 et seq.

Possession or sale of light wine or beer before permit secured or during time of revocation or suspension prohibited, see §67-3-57.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

1.5. Due process.

1. In general.

Sufficient-cause language within subsection (b) was an express grant of power that did not grant to the State Tax Commission arbitrary and capricious discretion; the commission was given authority to revoke, suspend or cancel a permit for noncompliance or other sufficient cause, and there was sufficient cause to find the business to have disregarded the authority and power of the Alcohol Beverage Control division. D. J. Koenig & Assocs. v. Miss. State Tax Comm'n, 838 So. 2d 246, 2003 Miss. LEXIS 61 (Miss. 2003).

Business was given due process consisting of notice and an opportunity to be heard; the statute was discussed in the first hearing, and this put the owner on notice that it was at issue in the second hearing. D. J. Koenig & Assocs. v. Miss. State Tax Comm'n, 838 So. 2d 246, 2003 Miss. LEXIS 61 (Miss. 2003).

Chancery Court jurisdiction in case under local option alcoholic beverage control law (§§67-1-1 et seq.) is appellate only; Chancery Court has no original authority to initially hear and determine merits of case under law and may not issue order quashing subpoena duces tecum issued by Alcoholic Beverage Control Division. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Elks Lodge # 553, 471 So. 2d 1225, 1985 Miss. LEXIS 2125 (Miss. 1985).

A chancery court order, removing the disabilities of a 19-year-old woman and empowering her to engage “in any profession or avocation which she could do if she were 21 years of age”, as decreed pursuant to Code 1972 §93-19-9, would take precedence over an Alcoholic Beverage Control Division regulation prohibiting the employment of persons under age 21 from the handling of alcoholic beverages, since the regulatory authority vested in the Division by Code 1972 §67-1-37(h) requires that such regulations not be inconsistent with other laws of the state. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Reynolds, 351 So. 2d 326, 1977 Miss. LEXIS 1927 (Miss. 1977).

Although this section, gives the state tax commission authority to designate hours when alcoholic beverages may be sold indifferent localities in the state which permit such sale, and the state tax commission did in fact approve the sale of alcoholic beverages in a certain municipality by hotels, restaurants, and clubs between the hours of 9 o’clock a.m. and 2 o’clock a.m. on all days except Sundays and election days, the allegation in a restaurant owners’ bill of complaint alleging that the sheriff of the county had publicly stated that he would repeatedly arrest the complainant if he continued to sell alcoholic beverages between midnight and 2 a.m. was not sufficient to show that complainant’s property rights were in danger of repeated arrest and prosecution by the sheriff, and was insufficient to support an injunction. Watkins v. Navarrette, 227 So. 2d 853, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1375 (Miss. 1969).

The state tax commission not only has the authority as a legislative administrative agency to hold a hearing upon the application of a county board of supervisors to determine “resort areas” but it was the commission’s duty to hold a public hearing upon the application; and a failure to conduct a hearing which is required by statute would have been unlawful, arbitrary, and capricious. Graves v. Rhoden, 218 So. 2d 424, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1598 (Miss. 1969).

Inasmuch as Code 1942, § 10265-05 excludes from the definition of “alcoholic beverage” beer and wine of not more than 4 percent of alcohol by weight, the authority conferred upon agents of the alcoholic beverage commission under this section and Code 1942, § 10265-11 does not authorize and empower them to check a retailer’s beer license to see whether it was in date or to inspect beer stock to determine whether it was Mississippi-taxed beer. Jolliff v. State, 215 So. 2d 234, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1338 (Miss. 1968), overruled, Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982), but see Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982).

1.5. Due process.

Due process was afforded the business owner pursuant to the statute via notice and an opportunity to be heard. D. J. Koenig & Assocs. v. Miss. State Tax Comm'n, 838 So. 2d 246, 2003 Miss. LEXIS 61 (Miss. 2003).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Validity and construction of statute or ordinance making it offense to have possession of open or unsealed alcoholic beverage in public place. 39 A.L.R.4th 668.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 87 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 126 et seq.

§ 67-1-39. Appeals from Board of Tax Appeals orders.

Any appeal from an order of the Board of Tax Appeals regarding an action taken under this chapter shall be filed without supersedeas to the Chancery Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi, if the appellant is the department, or to the county of the domicile of any other appellant. Any such appeal shall be based on the record made before the Board of Tax Appeals and shall be filed within thirty (30) days from the date of the order being appealed. There may be an appeal therefrom to the Supreme Court as in other cases provided, but it shall be without supersedeas on the order of the Board of Tax Appeals to them made and finally determined either by the chancery court or the Supreme Court. Actions taken by the department in suspending a permit when required by Section 93-11-157 or 93-11-163 are not actions resulting in an order from which an appeal may be taken under this section. Any appeal of a permit suspension that is required by Section 93-11-157 shall be taken in accordance with the appeal procedure specified in Section 93-11-157 or 93-11-163, as the case may be, rather than the procedure specified in this section.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-17; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 17; Laws, 1970, ch. 549, § 1; Laws, 1971, ch. 358, § 1; Laws, 1996, ch. 507, § 16; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 132, eff from and after July 1, 2010.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, rewrote and divided the former first sentence into the present first and second sentences; substituted “Board of Tax Appeals” for “commission” in the third sentence; and in the fourth sentence, substituted “department” for “commission,” and inserted “resulting in an order.”

Cross References —

Annual privilege taxes and other fees; permits; penalties; prohibition of alcoholic beverages in public places; see §27-71-5.

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Board of tax appeals, see §27-4-1 et seq.

Issuance and/or renewal of alcoholic beverage permits based on decision of board of tax appeals does not bar or estop department from appealing decision under this section, see §67-1-63.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Chancery court jurisdiction in case under local option alcoholic beverage control law (§§67-1-1 et seq.) is appellate only; chancery court has no original authority to initially hear and determine merits of case under law and may not issue order quashing subpoena duces tecum issued by Alcoholic Beverage Control Division. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Elks Lodge # 553, 471 So. 2d 1225, 1985 Miss. LEXIS 2125 (Miss. 1985).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 128, 130 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 171 et seq.

§ 67-1-41. Department of Revenue as a wholesale distributor and seller of alcoholic beverages; exception to department’s exclusive right to sell at wholesale.

  1. The department is hereby created a wholesale distributor and seller of alcoholic beverages, not including malt liquors, within the State of Mississippi. It is granted the sole right to import and sell intoxicating liquors at wholesale within the state, and no person who is granted the right to sell, distribute or receive intoxicating liquors at retail shall purchase any intoxicating liquors from any source other than the department except as authorized in subsections (4) and (9). The department may establish warehouses, purchase intoxicating liquors in such quantities and from such sources as it may deem desirable and sell the intoxicating liquors to authorized permittees within the state including, at the discretion of the department, any retail distributors operating within any military post or qualified resort areas within the boundaries of the state, keeping a correct and accurate record of all such transactions and exercising such control over the distribution of alcoholic beverages as seem right and proper in keeping with the provisions or purposes of this chapter.
  2. No person for the purpose of sale shall manufacture, distill, brew, sell, possess, export, transport, distribute, warehouse, store, solicit, take orders for, bottle, rectify, blend, treat, mix or process any alcoholic beverage except in accordance with authority granted under this chapter, or as otherwise provided by law for native wines.
  3. No alcoholic beverage intended for sale or resale shall be imported, shipped or brought into this state for delivery to any person other than as provided in this chapter, or as otherwise provided by law for native wines.
  4. The department may promulgate rules and regulations which authorize on-premises retailers to purchase limited amounts of alcoholic beverages from package retailers and for package retailers to purchase limited amounts of alcoholic beverages from other package retailers. The department shall develop and provide forms to be completed by the on-premises retailers and the package retailers verifying the transaction. The completed forms shall be forwarded to the department within a period of time prescribed by the department.
  5. The department may promulgate rules which authorize the holder of a package retailer’s permit to permit individual retail purchasers of packages of alcoholic beverages to return, for exchange, credit or refund, limited amounts of original sealed and unopened packages of alcoholic beverages purchased by the individual from the package retailer.
  6. The department shall maintain all forms to be completed by applicants necessary for licensure by the department at all district offices of the department.
  7. The department may promulgate rules which authorize the manufacturer of an alcoholic beverage or wine to import, transport and furnish or give a sample of alcoholic beverages or wines to the holders of package retailer’s permits, on-premises retailer’s permits, native wine retailer’s permits and temporary retailer’s permits who have not previously purchased the brand of that manufacturer from the department. For each holder of the designated permits, the manufacturer may furnish not more than five hundred (500) milliliters of any brand of alcoholic beverage and not more than three (3) liters of any brand of wine.
  8. The department may promulgate rules disallowing open product sampling of alcoholic beverages or wines by the holders of package retailer’s permits and permitting open product sampling of alcoholic beverages by the holders of on-premises retailer’s permits. Permitted sample products shall be plainly identified “sample” and the actual sampling must occur in the presence of the manufacturer’s representatives during the legal operating hours of on-premises retailers.
  9. The department may promulgate rules and regulations that authorize the holder of a research permit to import and purchase limited amounts of alcoholic beverages from importers, wineries and distillers of alcoholic beverages or from the department. The department shall develop and provide forms to be completed by the research permittee verifying each transaction. The completed forms shall be forwarded to the department within a period of time prescribed by the department. The records and inventory of alcoholic beverages shall be open to inspection at any time by the Director of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division or any duly authorized agent.
  10. This section shall not apply to alcoholic beverages authorized to be sold by the holder of a distillery retailer’s permit.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-18; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 18; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 15; Laws, 1988, ch. 397, § 1; Laws, 1990, ch. 479, § 1; Laws, 1992, ch. 574, § 1; Laws, 1994, ch. 538, § 2; Laws, 1998, ch. 413, § 1; Laws, 1999, ch. 408, § 1; Laws, 2006, ch. 352, § 3; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 4, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 3, 2006); Laws, 2018, ch. 453, § 4, eff from and after July 1, 2018.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 4 of ch. 529, Laws of 2006, effective from and after passage (approved April 3, 2006), amended this section. Section 3 of ch. 352, Laws of 2006, effective July 1, 2006, (approved March 13, 2006), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of both amendments pursuant to Section 1-1-109, which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of legislation ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the May 31, 2006, meeting of the Committee.

Editor's Notes —

Laws of 2018, ch. 453, § 5, provides:

“SECTION 5. Sections 1 and 3 of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after the passage of this act [April 13, 2018] and the remainder of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after July 1, 2018.”

Amendment Notes —

The first 2006 amendment (ch. 352) deleted “provided that retailers and consumers may purchase native wines directly from the producer” at the end of the second sentence in (1).

The second 2006 amendment (ch. 529), in (1), inserted “intoxicating” preceding “liquors at retail shall purchase” in the second sentence, substituted “intoxicating liquors” for “same” following “may deem desirable and sell the” in the last sentence, and deleted the former second and third paragraphs, which read “The commission is empowered to borrow such working capital as may be required, not to exceed the sum of Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars ($900,000.00). Such loan shall be repaid from the earnings of the wholesale liquor business.

“The commission is hereby authorized to use and to promulgate rules for the affixing of identification stamps to each container of alcoholic liquor”; and made minor stylistic changes in (1) and (5).”

The 2018 amendment substituted “department” for “State Tax Commission” near the beginning of (1) and for “commission” everywhere else it appears in the section; and added (10).

Cross References —

Prohibitions with respect to alcoholic beverages generally, with the exception of storage in private bonded warehouses pursuant to this section, see §67-1-9.

Inapplicability of the penalty provisions under certain circumstances to the purchase or receipt of intoxicating liquor from a source other than the commission, see §67-1-43.

Native Wines Law, see §§67-5-1 et seq.

Provision making it unlawful for a person to possess or sell intoxicating liquor, see §97-31-27.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Wholesale markup applied to liquor sold to federal military installations in Mississippi constituted a sales tax, the legal incidence of which rested upon instrumentalities of the United States as the purchasers, and therefore the markup was unconstitutional as a tax imposed upon the United States and its instrumentalities. Since the legal incidence of the tax was upon the United States, the federal immunity with respect to sales of liquor to the two exclusively federal enclaves was preserved by § 107(a) of the Buck Act (4 USCS §§ 105-110); The Twenty-First Amendment did not abolish federal immunity with respect to taxes on the sales of liquor to the concurrent jurisdiction bases. United States v. Tax Comm'n of Mississippi, 421 U.S. 599, 95 S. Ct. 1872, 44 L. Ed. 2d 404, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 120 (U.S. 1975).

Nothing occurs within a state giving it jurisdiction to regulate the initial wholesale transaction with respect to the initial sale and delivery of liquor by suppliers to military facilities located in exclusively federal enclaves when the goods are ordered by officers’ clubs and other nonappropriated fund activities and are then delivered within military bases over which the United States claims exclusive jurisdiction. United States v. State Tax Com., 412 U.S. 363, 93 S. Ct. 2183, 37 L. Ed. 2d 1, 1973 U.S. LEXIS 126 (U.S. 1973).

An indictment originally charging a violation of subsection (2) of this section by the unlawful and wilful storage of alcoholic beverages without authority of law could not thereafter be validly amended to include therein several essential elements of the offense sought to be charged, such as the holding of valid election whereby the county voted out from under the prohibition law and that the defendant did not possess a permit from the State of Mississippi authorizing him to store alcoholic liquors. Price v. State, 227 So. 2d 858, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1378 (Miss. 1969).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 188 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 285-287, 289-292.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-43. Obtaining intoxicants from source other than commission; penalty.

Any authorized retail distributor who shall purchase or receive intoxicating liquor from any source except from the commission, unless authorized by rules and regulations of the commission promulgated under subsection (4) of Section 67-1-41, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), nor more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00), to which may be added imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six (6) months. Any authorization of such person to sell intoxicating beverages may be revoked as provided by law.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-18; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 18; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 16; Laws, 1988, ch. 397, § 2; Laws, 2006, ch. 352, § 4, eff from and after July 1, 2006.

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment deleted the former second paragraph which read: “This section shall not apply to any authorized retail distributor who shall purchase native wines directly from the producer.”

Cross References —

Seizure without process of property subject to forfeiture because of unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

Native Wines Law, see §§67-5-1 et seq.

Rule making it unlawful to manufacture intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-21.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

The manufacture, possession or transportation of untaxed liquor is a crime involving dishonesty or false statement under Rule 609(a)(2), Miss. R. Ev., which permits impeachment of a witness’ testimony by evidence of conviction of such a crime. Johnson v. State, 529 So. 2d 577, 1988 Miss. LEXIS 272 (Miss. 1988).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 188 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 285-287, 289-292.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-45. Selling intoxicants to source other than commission; penalty.

No manufacturer, rectifier, or distiller of intoxicating liquor shall sell or attempt to sell any such intoxicating liquor, except malt liquor, within the State of Mississippi, except to the commission, or to the holder of a research permit as provided in Section 67-1-41. A producer of native wine may sell native wines to the commission or to consumers at the location of the native winery or its immediate vicinity.

Any violation of this section by any manufacturer, rectifier, or distiller shall be punished by a fine of not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), and not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00), to which may be added imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six (6) months.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-18; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 18; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 17; Laws, 1994, ch. 538, § 3; Laws, 2006, ch. 352, § 5, eff from and after July 1, 2006.

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment rewrote the last sentence of the first paragraph.

Cross References —

Seizure without process of property subject to forfeiture because of unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

Native Wines Law, see §§67-5-1 et seq.

Provision making it unlawful to possess or sell intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-27.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

The manufacture, possession or transportation of untaxed liquor is a crime involving dishonesty or false statement under Rule 609(a)(2), Miss. R. Ev., which permits impeachment of a witness’ testimony by evidence of conviction of such a crime. Johnson v. State, 529 So. 2d 577, 1988 Miss. LEXIS 272 (Miss. 1988).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 188 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 285-287, 289-292.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-46. Certain holders of manufacturer’s distiller’s permits authorized to provide limited amounts of alcoholic beverages on premises for tasting or sampling subject to certain conditions.

The holder of a manufacturer’s distiller’s permit who distills alcoholic beverages at a distillery located in this state may offer and provide limited amounts of alcoholic beverages on the premises of the distillery for the purpose of tasting or sampling, subject to the following conditions:

The alcoholic beverages provided for tasting or sampling must be manufactured in this state by the holder of the permit operating the distillery at the site of and on the premises of the distillery;

The alcoholic beverages may be provided only to persons on the premises of the distillery at no cost and for consumption on the premises of the distillery;

The alcoholic beverages may be provided for tasting or sampling between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on the same day and only in conjunction with a structured tour of the distillery and related facilities which must include the entire manufacturing and distilling processes and methods used at the distillery;

No one under twenty-one (21) years of age may participate in the tasting or sampling, and a sign indicating that prohibition shall be placed in a visible location at the entrance to the area where the tasting or sampling will be conducted;

An individual size sample of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed one-fourth (1/4) ounce, and no more than four (4) samples of alcoholic beverages may be provided to an individual within a twenty-four-hour period; and

The holder of the permit operating the distillery shall keep an accurate accounting of the various alcoholic beverages provided and consumed as samples.

HISTORY: Laws, 2013, ch. 352, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved March 18, 2013).

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected an error by deleting the (1) designator at the beginning of the section. The Joint Legislative Committee ratified the correction at its August 1, 2013, meeting.

§ 67-1-47. Distillers and distributors dealing with commission shall register with Secretary of State.

All distillers or distributors having contracts with the State Tax Commission for the sale of alcoholic beverages to the State Tax Commission, before making delivery of any merchandise to the State Tax Commission, shall register with the Secretary of State giving their name, address, name of all local agents and any other pertinent information which may be required by the Secretary of State and appointing an agent for the service of process within the State of Mississippi.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-41; Laws, 1968, ch. 526, § 1, eff and in force thirty (30) days after approval (approved August 7, 1968).

§ 67-1-49. Distillers and distributors dealing with commission shall file statements of salary expenses.

All distillers or distributors having contracts with the State Tax Commission for the sale of alcoholic beverages to said commission, shall, on or before February 1st of each year, file a statement, under oath, with the State Tax Commission and with the Secretary of State, listing the names and addresses of each person, firm or corporation in Mississippi to whom or which said distiller or distributor shall have paid or agreed to pay any fee, retainer, salary, or remuneration, during the preceding year, together with a statement of the purpose for such payment. Failure to file such statement shall constitute grounds for the commission to suspend the right of the distiller or distributor to sell to said commission until such time as said statement shall be filed.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-42; Laws, 1968, ch. 526, § 2, eff and in force thirty (30) days after approval (approved August 7, 1968).

§ 67-1-51. Permits; distance regulations; prohibition on ownership of more than one package retailer’s permit; prohibition on ownership of additional permits by persons living in same household.

  1. Permits which may be issued by the department shall be as follows:
    1. Manufacturer’s permit.A manufacturer’s permit shall permit the manufacture, importation in bulk, bottling and storage of alcoholic liquor and its distribution and sale to manufacturers holding permits under this chapter in this state and to persons outside the state who are authorized by law to purchase the same, and to sell exclusively to the department.

      Manufacturer’s permits shall be of the following classes:

      Class 1. Distiller’s and/or rectifier’s permit, which shall authorize the holder thereof to operate a distillery for the production of distilled spirits by distillation or redistillation and/or to operate a rectifying plant for the purifying, refining, mixing, blending, flavoring or reducing in proof of distilled spirits and alcohol.

      Class 2. Wine manufacturer’s permit, which shall authorize the holder thereof to manufacture, import in bulk, bottle and store wine or vinous liquor.

      Class 3. Native wine producer’s permit, which shall authorize the holder thereof to produce, bottle, store and sell native wines.

    2. Package retailer’s permit.Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph and Section 67-1-52, a package retailer’s permit shall authorize the holder thereof to operate a store exclusively for the sale at retail in original sealed and unopened packages of alcoholic beverages, including native wines, not to be consumed on the premises where sold. Alcoholic beverages shall not be sold by any retailer in any package or container containing less than fifty (50) milliliters by liquid measure. A package retailer’s permit, with prior approval from the department, shall authorize the holder thereof to sample new product furnished by a manufacturer’s representative or his employees at the permitted place of business so long as the sampling otherwise complies with this chapter and applicable department regulations. Such samples may not be provided to customers at the permitted place of business. In addition to the sale at retail of packages of alcoholic beverages, the holder of a package retailer’s permit is authorized to sell at retail corkscrews, wine glasses, soft drinks, ice, juices, mixers and other beverages commonly used to mix with alcoholic beverages. Nonalcoholic beverages sold by the holder of a package retailer’s permit shall not be consumed on the premises where sold.
    3. On-premises retailer’s permit. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section, an on-premises retailer’s permit shall authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages, including native wines, for consumption on the licensed premises only; however, a patron of the permit holder may remove one (1) bottle of wine from the licensed premises if: (i) the patron consumed a portion of the bottle of wine in the course of consuming a meal purchased on the licensed premises; (ii) the permit holder securely reseals the bottle; (iii) the bottle is placed in a bag that is secured in a manner so that it will be visibly apparent if the bag is opened; and (iv) a dated receipt for the wine and the meal is available. Such a permit shall be issued only to qualified hotels, restaurants and clubs, and to common carriers with adequate facilities for serving passengers. In resort areas, whether inside or outside of a municipality, the department, in its discretion, may issue on-premises retailer’s permits to such establishments as it deems proper. An on-premises retailer’s permit when issued to a common carrier shall authorize the sale and serving of alcoholic beverages aboard any licensed vehicle while moving through any county of the state; however, the sale of such alcoholic beverages shall not be permitted while such vehicle is stopped in a county that has not legalized such sales. If an on-premises retailer’s permit is applied for by a common carrier operating solely in the water, such common carrier must, along with all other qualifications for a permit, (i) be certified to carry at least one hundred fifty (150) passengers and/or provide overnight accommodations for at least fifty (50) passengers and (ii) operate primarily in the waters within the State of Mississippi which lie adjacent to the State of Mississippi south of the three (3) most southern counties in the State of Mississippi and/or on the Mississippi River or navigable waters within any county bordering on the Mississippi River.
    4. Solicitor’s permit.A solicitor’s permit shall authorize the holder thereof to act as salesman for a manufacturer or wholesaler holding a proper permit, to solicit on behalf of his employer orders for alcoholic beverages, and to otherwise promote his employer’s products in a legitimate manner. Such a permit shall authorize the representation of and employment by one (1) principal only. However, the permittee may also, in the discretion of the department, be issued additional permits to represent other principals. No such permittee shall buy or sell alcoholic beverages for his own account, and no such beverage shall be brought into this state in pursuance of the exercise of such permit otherwise than through a permit issued to a wholesaler or manufacturer in the state.
    5. Native wine retailer’s permit. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section, a native wine retailer’s permit shall be issued only to a holder of a Class 3 manufacturer’s permit, and shall authorize the holder thereof to make retail sales of native wines to consumers for on-premises consumption or to consumers in originally sealed and unopened containers at an establishment located on the premises of or in the immediate vicinity of a native winery.
    6. Temporary retailer’s permit. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section, a temporary retailer’s permit shall permit the purchase and resale of alcoholic beverages, including native wines, during legal hours on the premises described in the temporary permit only.

      Temporary retailer’s permits shall be of the following classes:

      Class 1. A temporary one-day permit may be issued to bona fide nonprofit civic or charitable organizations authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages, including native wine, for consumption on the premises described in the temporary permit only. Class 1 permits may be issued only to applicants demonstrating to the department, by a statement signed under penalty of perjury submitted ten (10) days prior to the proposed date or such other time as the department may determine, that they meet the qualifications of Sections 67-1-11, 67-1-37, 67-1-51(2) and (3), 67-1-55, 67-1-57 (excluding paragraph (e)) and 67-1-59. Class 1 permittees shall obtain all alcoholic beverages from package retailers located in the county in which the temporary permit is issued. Alcoholic beverages remaining in stock upon expiration of the temporary permit may be returned by the permittee to the package retailer for a refund of the purchase price upon consent of the package retailer or may be kept by the permittee exclusively for personal use and consumption, subject to all laws pertaining to the illegal sale and possession of alcoholic beverages. The department, following review of the statement provided by the applicant and the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations, may issue the permit.

      Class 2. A temporary permit, not to exceed seventy (70) days, may be issued to prospective permittees seeking to transfer a permit authorized in paragraph (c) of this subsection. A Class 2 permit may be issued only to applicants demonstrating to the department, by a statement signed under the penalty of perjury, that they meet the qualifications of Sections 67-1-5(l), (m), (n), (o), (p) or (q), 67-1-37, 67-1-51(2) and (3), 67-1-55, 67-1-57 and 67-1-59. The department, following a preliminary review of the statement provided by the applicant and the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations, may issue the permit.

      Class 2 temporary permittees must purchase their alcoholic beverages directly from the department or, with approval of the department, purchase the remaining stock of the previous permittee. If the proposed applicant of a Class 1 or Class 2 temporary permit falsifies information contained in the application or statement, the applicant shall never again be eligible for a retail alcohol beverage permit and shall be subject to prosecution for perjury.

      Class 3. A temporary one-day permit may be issued to a retail establishment authorizing the complimentary distribution of wine, including native wine, to patrons of the retail establishment at an open house or promotional event, for consumption only on the premises described in the temporary permit. A Class 3 permit may be issued only to an applicant demonstrating to the department, by a statement signed under penalty of perjury submitted ten (10) days before the proposed date or such other time as the department may determine, that it meets the qualifications of Sections 67-1-11, 67-1-37, 67-1-51(2) and (3), 67-1-55, 67-1-57 (excluding paragraph (e)) and 67-1-59. A Class 3 permit holder shall obtain all alcoholic beverages from the holder(s) of a package retailer’s permit located in the county in which the temporary permit is issued. Wine remaining in stock upon expiration of the temporary permit may be returned by the Class 3 temporary permit holder to the package retailer for a refund of the purchase price, with consent of the package retailer, or may be kept by the Class 3 temporary permit holder exclusively for personal use and consumption, subject to all laws pertaining to the illegal sale and possession of alcoholic beverages. The department, following review of the statement provided by the applicant and the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations, may issue the permit. No retailer may receive more than twelve (12) Class 3 temporary permits in a calendar year. A Class 3 temporary permit shall not be issued to a retail establishment that either holds a merchant permit issued under paragraph (l) of this subsection, or holds a permit issued under Chapter 3, Title 67, Mississippi Code of 1972, authorizing the holder to engage in the business of a retailer of light wine or beer.

    7. Caterer’s permit. A caterer’s permit shall permit the purchase of alcoholic beverages by a person engaging in business as a caterer and the resale of alcoholic beverages by such person in conjunction with such catering business. No person shall qualify as a caterer unless forty percent (40%) or more of the revenue derived from such catering business shall be from the serving of prepared food and not from the sale of alcoholic beverages and unless such person has obtained a permit for such business from the Department of Health. A caterer’s permit shall not authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages on the premises of the person engaging in business as a caterer; however, the holder of an on-premises retailer’s permit may hold a caterer’s permit. When the holder of an on-premises retailer’s permit or an affiliated entity of the holder also holds a caterer’s permit, the caterer’s permit shall not authorize the service of alcoholic beverages on a consistent, recurring basis at a separate, fixed location owned or operated by the caterer, on-premises retailer or affiliated entity and an on-premises retailer’s permit shall be required for the separate location. All sales of alcoholic beverages by holders of a caterer’s permit shall be made at the location being catered by the caterer, and, except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section, such sales may be made only for consumption at the catered location. The location being catered may be anywhere within a county or judicial district that has voted to come out from under the dry laws or in which the sale, distribution and possession of alcoholic beverages is otherwise authorized by law. Such sales shall be made pursuant to any other conditions and restrictions which apply to sales made by on-premises retail permittees. The holder of a caterer’s permit or his employees shall remain at the catered location as long as alcoholic beverages are being sold pursuant to the permit issued under this paragraph (g), and the permittee shall have at the location the identification card issued by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the department. No unsold alcoholic beverages may be left at the catered location by the permittee upon the conclusion of his business at that location. Appropriate law enforcement officers and Alcoholic Beverage Control Division personnel may enter a catered location on private property in order to enforce laws governing the sale or serving of alcoholic beverages.
    8. Research permit. A research permit shall authorize the holder thereof to operate a research facility for the professional research of alcoholic beverages. Such permit shall authorize the holder of the permit to import and purchase limited amounts of alcoholic beverages from the department or from importers, wineries and distillers of alcoholic beverages for professional research.
    9. Alcohol processing permit. An alcohol processing permit shall authorize the holder thereof to purchase, transport and possess alcoholic beverages for the exclusive use in cooking, processing or manufacturing products which contain alcoholic beverages as an integral ingredient. An alcohol processing permit shall not authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages on the premises of the person engaging in the business of cooking, processing or manufacturing products which contain alcoholic beverages. The amounts of alcoholic beverages allowed under an alcohol processing permit shall be set by the department.
    10. Hospitality cart permit. A hospitality cart permit shall authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages from a mobile cart on a golf course that is the holder of an on-premises retailer’s permit. The alcoholic beverages sold from the cart must be consumed within the boundaries of the golf course.
    11. Special service permit. A special service permit shall authorize the holder to sell commercially sealed alcoholic beverages to the operator of a commercial or private aircraft for en route consumption only by passengers. A special service permit shall be issued only to a fixed-base operator who contracts with an airport facility to provide fueling and other associated services to commercial and private aircraft.
    12. Merchant permit. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section, a merchant permit shall be issued only to the owner of a spa facility, an art studio or gallery, or a cooking school, and shall authorize the holder to serve complimentary by the glass wine only, including native wine, at the holder’s spa facility, art studio or gallery, or cooking school. A merchant permit holder shall obtain all wine from the holder of a package retailer’s permit.
    13. Temporary alcoholic beverages charitable auction permit. A temporary permit, not to exceed five (5) days, may be issued to a qualifying charitable nonprofit organization that is exempt from taxation under Section 501(c)(3) or (4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The permit shall authorize the holder to sell alcoholic beverages for the limited purpose of raising funds for the organization during a live or silent auction that is conducted by the organization and that meets the following requirements: (i) the auction is conducted in an area of the state where the sale of alcoholic beverages is authorized; (ii) if the auction is conducted on the premises of an on-premises retailer’s permit holder, then the alcoholic beverages to be auctioned must be stored separately from the alcoholic beverages sold, stored or served on the premises, must be removed from the premises immediately following the auction, and may not be consumed on the premises; (iii) the permit holder may not conduct more than two (2) auctions during a calendar year; (iv) the permit holder may not pay a commission or promotional fee to any person to arrange or conduct the auction.
    14. Event venue retailer’s permit. An event venue retailer’s permit shall authorize the holder thereof to purchase and resell alcoholic beverages, including native wines, for consumption on the premises during legal hours during events held on the licensed premises if food is being served at the event by a caterer who is not affiliated with or related to the permittee. The caterer must serve at least three (3) entrees. The permit may only be issued for venues that can accommodate two hundred (200) persons or more. The number of persons a venue may accommodate shall be determined by the local fire department and such determination shall be provided in writing and submitted along with all other documents required to be provided for an on-premises retailer’s permit. The permittee must derive the majority of its revenue from event-related fees, including, but not limited to, admission fees or ticket sales for live entertainment in the building. “Event-related fees” do not include alcohol, beer or light wine sales or any fee which may be construed to cover the cost of alcohol, beer or light wine. This determination shall be made on a per event basis. An event may not last longer than two (2) consecutive days per week.
    15. Temporary theatre permit. A temporary theatre permit, not to exceed five (5) days, may be issued to a charitable nonprofit organization that is exempt from taxation under Section 501(c)(3) or (4) of the Internal Revenue Code and owns or operates a theatre facility that features plays and other theatrical performances and productions. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section, the permit shall authorize the holder to sell alcoholic beverages, including native wines, to patrons of the theatre during performances and productions at the theatre facility for consumption during such performances and productions on the premises of the facility described in the permit. A temporary theatre permit holder shall obtain all alcoholic beverages from package retailers located in the county in which the permit is issued. Alcoholic beverages remaining in stock upon expiration of the temporary theatre permit may be returned by the permittee to the package retailer for a refund of the purchase price upon consent of the package retailer or may be kept by the permittee exclusively for personal use and consumption, subject to all laws pertaining to the illegal sale and possession of alcoholic beverages.
    16. Charter ship operator’s permit. Subject to the provisions of this paragraph (p), a charter ship operator’s permit shall authorize the holder thereof and its employees to serve, monitor, store and otherwise control the serving and availability of alcoholic beverages to customers of the permit holder during private charters under contract provided by the permit holder. A charter ship operator’s permit shall authorize such action by the permit holder and its employees only as to alcoholic beverages brought onto the permit holder’s ship by customers of the permit holder as part of such a private charter. All such alcoholic beverages must be removed from the charter ship at the conclusion of each private charter. A charter ship operator’s permit shall not authorize the permit holder to sell, charge for or otherwise supply alcoholic beverages to customers, except as authorized in this paragraph (p). For the purposes of this paragraph (p), “charter ship operator” means a common carrier that (i) is certified to carry at least one hundred fifty (150) passengers and/or provide overnight accommodations for at least fifty (50) passengers, (ii) operates only in the waters within the State of Mississippi, which lie adjacent to the State of Mississippi south of the three (3) most southern counties in the State of Mississippi, and (iii) provides charters under contract for tours and trips in such waters.
    17. Distillery retailer’s permit. The holder of a Class 1 manufacturer’s permit may obtain a distillery retailer’s permit. A distillery retailer’s permit shall authorize the holder thereof to sell at retail alcoholic beverages by the sealed and unopened bottle from a retail location at the distillery for off-premises consumption. The holder may only sell product manufactured by the manufacturer at the distillery described in the permit. The holder shall not sell at retail more than ten percent (10%) of the alcoholic beverages produced annually at its distillery. The holder shall not make retail sales of more than two and twenty-five one-hundredths (2.25) liters, in the aggregate, of the alcoholic beverages produced at its distillery to any one (1) individual for consumption off the premises of the distillery within a twenty-four-hour period. The hours of sale shall be the same as those hours for package retailers under this chapter. The holder of a distillery retailer’s permit is not required to purchase the alcoholic beverages authorized to be sold by this paragraph from the department’s liquor distribution warehouse; however, if the holder does not purchase the alcoholic beverages from the department’s liquor distribution warehouse, the holder shall pay to the department all taxes, fees and surcharges on the alcoholic beverages that are imposed upon the sale of alcoholic beverages shipped by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the Department of Revenue. In addition to alcoholic beverages, the holder of a distillery retailer’s permit may sell at retail promotional products from the same retail location, including shirts, hats, glasses, and other promotional products customarily sold by alcoholic beverage manufacturers.
  2. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (4) of this section, retail permittees may hold more than one (1) retail permit, at the discretion of the department.
  3. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no authority shall be granted to any person to manufacture, sell or store for sale any intoxicating liquor as specified in this chapter within four hundred (400) feet of any church, school, kindergarten or funeral home. However, within an area zoned commercial or business, such minimum distance shall be not less than one hundred (100) feet.

    A church or funeral home may waive the distance restrictions imposed in this subsection in favor of allowing issuance by the department of a permit, pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, to authorize activity relating to the manufacturing, sale or storage of alcoholic beverages which would otherwise be prohibited under the minimum distance criterion. Such waiver shall be in written form from the owner, the governing body, or the appropriate officer of the church or funeral home having the authority to execute such a waiver, and the waiver shall be filed with and verified by the department before becoming effective.

    The distance restrictions imposed in this subsection shall not apply to the sale or storage of alcoholic beverages at a bed and breakfast inn listed in the National Register of Historic Places or to the sale or storage of alcoholic beverages in a historic district that is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, is a qualified resort area and is located in a municipality having a population greater than one hundred thousand (100,000) according to the latest federal decennial census.

  4. No person, either individually or as a member of a firm, partnership, limited liability company or association, or as a stockholder, officer or director in a corporation, shall own or control any interest in more than one (1) package retailer’s permit, nor shall such person’s spouse, if living in the same household of such person, any relative of such person, if living in the same household of such person, or any other person living in the same household with such person own any interest in any other package retailer’s permit.
    1. In addition to any other authority granted under this section, the holder of a permit issued under subsection (1)(c), (e), (f), (g), (l), (n) and/or (o) of this section may sell or otherwise provide alcoholic beverages and/or wine to a patron of the permit holder in the manner authorized in the permit and the patron may remove an open glass, cup or other container of the alcoholic beverage and/or wine from the licensed premises and may possess and consume the alcoholic beverage or wine outside of the licensed premises if: (i) the licensed premises is located within a leisure and recreation district created under Section 67-1-101 and (ii) the patron remains within the boundaries of the leisure and recreation district while in possession of the alcoholic beverage or wine.
    2. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to allow a person to bring any alcoholic beverages into a permitted premises except to the extent otherwise authorized by this chapter.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10265-18, 10265-19, 10265-26; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, §§ 18, 19, 26; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 18; Laws, 1988, ch. 302, § 1; Laws, 1988, ch. 383, § 2; Laws, 1989, ch. 484, § 1; Laws, 1992, ch. 574, § 2; Laws, 1994, ch. 538, § 4; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 2; Laws, 1997, ch. 487, § 1; Laws, 2000, ch. 307, § 1; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 5; Laws, 2007, ch. 462, § 8; Laws, 2008, 1st Ex Sess, ch. 48, § 1; Laws, 2009, ch. 465, § 2; Laws, 2012, ch. 566, § 2; Laws, 2014, ch. 516, § 1; Laws, 2014, ch. 527, § 1; Laws, 2015, ch. 462, § 1; Laws, 2016, ch. 471, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2016; Laws, 2018, ch. 382, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2018; Laws, 2018, ch. 453, § 1, eff from and after April 13, 2018.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 1 of Chapter 516, Laws of 2014, effective from and after July 1, 2014 (approved April 23, 2014), amended this section. Section 1 of Chapter 527, Laws of 2014, effective from and after July 1, 2014 (approved April 23, 2014), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of both amendments pursuant to Section 1-1-109, which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the July 24, 2014, meeting of the Committee.

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected a typographical error in the second sentence of (1)(c) by substituting “Such a permit shall be issued only to…” for “Such a permit shall issue only to…” The Joint Committee ratified the correction at its July 24, 2014, meeting.

Section 1 of Chapter 382, Laws of 2018, effective July 1, 2018, amended this section. Section 1 of Chapter 453, Laws of 2018, effective upon passage (approved April 13, 2018), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 1 of Chapter 453, Laws of 2018, which contains language that specifically provides that it supersedes §67-1-51 as amended by Chapter 382, Laws of 2018.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2012, ch. 566, § 10 provides:

“SECTION 10. Sections 8 and 9 of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage, and the remaining sections of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after July 1, 2012.”

Laws of 2018, ch. 453, § 5, provides:

“SECTION 5. Sections 1 and 3 of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after the passage of this act [April 13, 2018] and the remainder of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after July 1, 2018.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment rewrote (1)(g); and inserted “limited liability company” following “partnership” near the beginning of (4).

The 2007 amendment added (1)(j).

The 2008 amendment (ch. 48, 1st Ex Sess) added “or to the sale or storage of alcoholic beverages. . . according to the latest federal decennial census” at the end of the last paragraph of (3).

The 2009 amendment rewrote (1)(c); in (1)(f) substituted “paragraph” for “either paragraph (b) or” in the fourth paragraph, and added the sixth paragraph; and added (1)(k) through (m).

The 2012 amendment substituted “department” for “commission” throughout the section; and in (1)(f), substituted ‘a statement signed under penalty of perjury‘ or “statement provided by the applicant” or similar words for “affidavit” everywhere it appeared, and substituted “paragraph (c) of this subsection” for “paragraph (c) of this section‘ in Class 1”, and “paragraph ( l ) of this subsection” for “paragraph ( l ) of this section” in the last sentence of Class 3.

The first 2014 amendment (ch. 516), in (1)(b), inserted “and 67-1-52” following “provided in this paragraph” in the first sentence and, added the third and fourth sentences.

The second 2014 amendment (ch. 527) added (1)(n).

The 2015 amendment added (1)(o) and (p).

The 2016 amendment, in (1), added the exception at the beginning of the first sentence of (c), (e), (f) and ( l ) and the beginning of the second sentence of (o), and inserted “except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section” in the fifth sentence of (1)(g); and added (5).

The first 2018 amendment (ch. 382) added the last sentence of (1)(c).

The second 2018 amendment (ch. 453), effective April 13, 2018, provided for two versions of the section; in the version effective through June 30, 2018, in (1)(m), substituted “alcoholic beverages” for “wine” once in the paragraph heading and four times in the paragraph text; and in the version effective from and after July 1, 2018, added the last sentence of (1)(c), and added (1)(q)).

Cross References —

Annual privilege tax for permits, see §27-71-5.

Effect of local option for prohibition on holders of native wine producer’s and retailer’s permits, see §67-1-13.

Commission to maintain all forms to be completed by applicants necessary for licensure at all district offices, see §67-1-41.

Permits and licenses to sell, etc., light wine and beer, see §§67-3-15 to67-3-41.

Prohibition on manufacturers of light wine or beer acting as wholesalers or distributors, see §67-3-46.

Native Wines Law, see §§67-5-1 et seq.

Federal Aspects—

Provisions of Section 501(c)(3), see 26 USCS § 501(c)(3).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

A decision of a city council, refusing to issue a city permit to operate a place of business to sell alcoholic beverages upon the ground that the business was within 500 feet of a church, against the applicant’s claim that the place of business was within the distance regulated by the city ordinance because the building called a church was not a church in fact but a storehouse for the use of a church, would not be interfered with by the court, since the question was an issue of fact for the determination of the administrative agency in the first instance. Crawford v. Pascagoula, 243 So. 2d 555, 1971 Miss. LEXIS 1516 (Miss. 1971).

The refusal of the state tax commission to issue a permit for the operation of a package liquor store at a location closer than 100 feet to a building in which a day care center for children was operated was not an arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable action; nor did it constitute an abuse of discretion. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Package Store, Inc., 208 So. 2d 46, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1392 (Miss. 1968).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Sale of alcohol to charter airline that does not have license for sale of alcoholic beverages by licensed package retailer for complimentary distribution is within perimeters established by Section 67-1-51(b). Diaz, Jan. 5, 1994, A.G. Op. #93-0856.

It is up to the State Tax Commission whether to issue a waiver for the distance requirement between a day care and a restaurant serving liquor by the drink. Mayo, Mar. 4, 2005, A.G. Op. 05-0076.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

“School,” “schoolhouse,” or the like within statute prohibiting liquor sales within specified distance thereof. 49 A.L.R.2d 1103.

“Church” or the like, within statute prohibiting liquor sales within specified distance thereof. 59 A.L.R.2d 1439.

Right to withdraw application to procure or to transfer liquor license. 73 A.L.R.2d 1223.

Measurement of distances for purposes of enactment prohibiting sale, or license for sale, of intoxicating liquor within given distance from church, university, school, or other institution or property as base. 4 A.L.R.3d 1250.

Construction of provision precluding sale of intoxicating liquors within specified distance from another establishment selling such liquors. 7 A.L.R.3d 809.

Zoning regulation of intoxicating liquor as pre-empted by state law. 65 A.L.R.4th 555.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 87 et seq.

10 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 151:21 et seq. (public regulation; licensing).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 126 et seq.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-52. Holder of package retailer’s permit authorized to conduct tasting or sampling events subject to certain conditions.

A package retailer’s permit issued under Section 67-1-51(b) shall, with prior written approval from the department, authorize tasting or sampling events to be conducted at the package retailer’s permitted place of business during which tastes or samples of alcoholic beverages may be offered or served to consumers at no cost. During a tasting or sampling event authorized by this section, limited amounts of alcoholic beverages may be consumed on the permitted place of business. A tasting or sampling event shall not authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the permitted place of business, but shall only authorize the limited consumption of alcoholic beverages at the permitted place of business for the sole purpose of tasting or sampling various alcoholic beverages. A tasting or sampling event shall be conducted completely within an area that is cordoned off by barriers clearly separating the event from the point of sale of any alcoholic beverage and may last not longer than four (4) hours. No one under twenty-one (21) years of age may participate in a tasting or sampling event and a sign indicating this shall be placed in a clearly visible location at the entrance to the area where the tasting or sampling event will be conducted. No food may be served or sold at a tasting or sampling event. Each sample of wine served at the event shall not exceed one and one-fourth (1-1/4) ounces and no more than a cumulative total of five (5) ounces of wine may be dispensed to any one (1) person during a tasting or sampling event. Each sample of a distilled spirit served at the event shall not exceed one-fourth (1/4) of an ounce and no more than a cumulative total of one (1) ounce of distilled spirits may be dispensed to any one (1) person during a tasting or sampling event. All product tasted or sampled at the event must be provided by the package retailer from its inventory. Such product cannot be sample product provided by a manufacturer and must have been purchased from the department warehouse or from a licensed wholesaler. Only employees of the package retailer may serve any product for tasting or sampling at the event. Tickets for a tasting or sampling event shall not be sold in the permitted place of business or any other location. The holder of a tasting or sampling event shall keep an accurate accounting of the various alcoholic beverages and amounts consumed at each tasting or sampling event and must provide a copy of the accounting to the department within ten (10) days of completion of the event. The holder of a package retailer’s permit may conduct not more than one (1) event in a three-month period.

HISTORY: Laws, 2014, ch. 516, § 2; Laws, 2015, ch. 329, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2015.

Amendment Notes —

The 2015 amendment deleted the former last paragraph, which read: “This section shall be repealed from and after July 1, 2015.”

§ 67-1-53. Application for permit; notice of application.

  1. Application for permits shall be in such form and shall contain such information as shall be required by the regulations of the commission; however, no regulation of the commission shall require personal financial information from any officer of a corporation applying for an on-premises retailer’s permit to sell alcoholic beverages unless such officer owns ten percent (10%) or more of the stock of such corporation.
  2. Every applicant for each type of permit authorized by Section 67-1-51 shall give notice of such application by publication for two (2) consecutive issues in a newspaper of general circulation published in the city or town in which applicant’s place of business is located. However, in instances where no newspaper is published in the city or town, then the notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county where the applicant’s business is located. If no newspaper is published in the county, the notice shall be published in a qualified newspaper which is published in the closest neighboring county and circulated in the county of applicant’s residence. The notice shall be printed in ten-point black face type and shall set forth the type of permit to be applied for, the exact location of the place of business, the name of the owner or owners thereof, and if operating under an assumed name, the trade name together with the names of all owners, and if a corporation, the names and titles of all officers. The cost of such notice shall be borne by the applicant.
  3. Each application or filing made under this section shall include the social security number(s) of the applicant in accordance with Section 93-11-64, Mississippi Code of 1972.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-19; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 19; Laws, 1993, ch. 362, § 1; Laws, 1997, ch. 588, § 21; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 7, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 3, 2006.).

Editor’s Notes —

Laws, 1997, ch. 588, § 150, provides as follows:

“SECTION 150. Any person or entity shall be absolutely immune from any liability arising from compliance with the dictates of this act unless such conduct by the person or entity is willful and intentional”.

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment substituted “ten percent (10%)” for “five percent (5%)” near the end of (1); and in (2), substituted “notice” for “same” preceding “shall be published” in the second sentence, and made minor stylistic changes.

Cross References —

Application for light wine and beer permit, see §67-3-17.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Right to withdraw application to procure liquor license. 73 A.L.R.2d 1223.

What constitutes newspaper of “general circulation” within meaning of state statutes requiring publication of official notices and the like in such newspaper. 24 A.L.R.4th 822.

Application of requirement that newspaper be locally published for official notice publication. 85 A.L.R.4th 581.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 118.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 21-44 (issuance or refusal to issue licenses).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 151 et seq.

§ 67-1-55. Applicants for permits must disclose persons financially interested in business; penalty.

No permit of any type shall be issued by the commission until the applicant has first filed with the commission a sworn statement disclosing all persons who are financially involved in the operation of the business for which the permit is sought. If an applicant is an individual, he will swear that he owns one hundred percent (100%) of the business for which he is seeking a permit. If the applicant is a partnership, all partners and their addresses shall be disclosed and the extent of their interest in the partnership shall be disclosed. If the applicant is a corporation, the total stock in the corporation shall be disclosed and each shareholder and his address and the amount of stock in the corporation owned by him shall be disclosed. If the applicant is a limited liability company, each member and their addresses shall be disclosed and the extent of their interest in the limited liability company shall be disclosed. If the applicant is a trust, the trustee and all beneficiaries and their addresses shall be disclosed. If the applicant is a combination of any of the above, all information required to be disclosed above shall be required.

All the disclosures shall be in writing and kept on file at the commission’s office and shall be available to the public.

Every applicant must, when applying for a renewal of his permit, disclose any change in the ownership of the business or any change in the beneficiaries of the income from the business.

Any person who willfully fails to fully disclose the information required by this section, or who gives false information, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined a sum not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or imprisoned for not more than one (1) year, or both, and the person or applicant shall never again be eligible for any permit pertaining to alcoholic beverages.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-20; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 20; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 9, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 3, 2006.).

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment added the fifth sentence in the first paragraph; in the last paragraph, substituted “disclose the information required by this section” for “disclose the above information” and substituted “to exceed” for “exceeding” preceding “Five Hundred Dollars”; and made minor stylistic changes throughout.

Cross References —

Temporary, one-day permit authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-51.

Temporary permit for those seeking to transfer either a package retailer’s permit or an on-premises retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Application of this section to the qualifications for a Class 1 or Class 2 temporary retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Suspension and revocation of permits, see §67-1-71.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

The licensing power for retail liquor permits is placed in the state tax commission, not the courts, and the commission is given a wide latitude and discretion in acting upon applications for such permits. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

No person has a vested right to have a license for the sale of intoxicating liquors issued to him, and qualifications prescribed by statute are construed as strict limitations on the granting of such licenses. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

Where another person who is himself disqualified from holding a license for operation of a retail liquor store has a financial interest in the premises or business and would dominate the applicant in operating the business, the license may be refused. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

In determining whether to grant a retail liquor dealer’s license the state tax commission can consider the evidence and all reasonable inferences from it, and where the applicant for the license was a young woman college student whose father had previously been denied a license to operate a package store on the same premises by reason of his judgment indebtedness to the commission, that body could reasonably conclude that it was highly probable that the applicant, in the operation of the business, would be under the direction and control of her father. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Liquor license as subject to execution or attachment. 40 A.L.R.4th 927.

§ 67-1-57. Qualification of applicants.

Before a permit is issued the department shall satisfy itself:

That the applicant, if an individual, or if a partnership, each of the members of the partnership, or if a corporation, each of its principal officers and directors, or if a limited liability company, each member of the limited liability company, is of good moral character and, in addition, enjoys a reputation of being a peaceable, law-abiding citizen of the community in which he resides, and is generally fit for the trust to be reposed in him, is not less than twenty-one (21) years of age, and has not been convicted of a felony in any state or federal court.

That, except in the case of an application for a solicitor’s permit, the applicant is the true and actual owner of the business for which the permit is desired, and that he intends to carry on the business authorized for himself and not as the agent of any other person, and that he intends to superintend in person the management of the business or that he will designate a manager to manage the business for him. All managers must be approved by the department prior to completing any managerial tasks on behalf of the permittee and must possess all of the qualifications required of a permittee; however, a felony conviction, other than a crime of violence, does not automatically disqualify a person from being approved as a manager if the person was released from incarceration at least three (3) years prior to application for approval as a manager. A felony conviction, other than a crime of violence, may be considered by the department in determining whether all other qualifications are met.

That the applicant for a package retailer’s permit, if an individual, is a resident of the State of Mississippi. If the applicant is a partnership, each member of the partnership must be a resident of the state. If the applicant is a limited liability company, each member of the limited liability company must be a resident of the state. If the applicant is a corporation, the designated manager of the corporation must be a resident of the state.

That the place for which the permit is to be issued is an appropriate one considering the character of the premises and the surrounding neighborhood.

That the place for which the permit is to be issued is within the corporate limits of an incorporated municipality or qualified resort area or club which comes within the provisions of this chapter.

That the applicant is not indebted to the state for any taxes, fees or payment of penalties imposed by any law of the State of Mississippi or by any rule or regulation of the commission.

That the applicant is not in the habit of using alcoholic beverages to excess and is not physically or mentally incapacitated, and that the applicant has the ability to read and write the English language.

That the commission does not believe and has no reason to believe that the applicant will sell or knowingly permit any agent, servant or employee to unlawfully sell liquor in a dry area or in any other manner contrary to law.

That the applicant is not residentially domiciled with any person whose permit or license has been cancelled for cause within the twelve (12) months next preceding the date of the present application for a permit.

That the commission has not, in the exercise of its discretion which is reserved and preserved to it, refused to grant permits under the restrictions of this section, as well as under any other pertinent provision of this chapter.

That there are not sufficient legal reasons to deny a permit on the ground that the premises for which the permit is sought has previously been operated, used or frequented for any purpose or in any manner that is lewd, immoral or offensive to public decency. In the granting or withholding of any permit to sell alcoholic beverages at retail, the commission in forming its conclusions may give consideration to any recommendations made in writing by the district or county attorney or county, circuit or chancery judge of the county, or the sheriff of the county, or the mayor or chief of police of an incorporated city or town wherein the applicant proposes to conduct his business and to any recommendations made by representatives of the commission.

That the applicant and the applicant’s key employees, as determined by the commission, do not have a disqualifying criminal record. In order to obtain a criminal record history check, the applicant shall submit to the commission a set of fingerprints from any local law enforcement agency for each person for whom the records check is required. The commission shall forward the fingerprints to the Mississippi Department of Public Safety. If no disqualifying record is identified at the state level, the Department of Public Safety shall forward the fingerprints to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a national criminal history record check. Costs for processing the set or sets of fingerprints shall be borne by the applicant. The commission shall not deny employment to an employee of the applicant prior to the identification of a disqualifying record or other disqualifying information.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-23; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 23; Laws, 1968, ch. 591, § 1; Laws, 1993, ch. 314, § 1; Laws, 2002, ch. 494, § 1, Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 10; Laws, 2016, ch. 426, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2016.

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment inserted “or if a limited liability company, each member of the limited liability company” in (a); added the next-to-last sentence in (c); and made minor stylistic changes throughout.

The 2016 amendment substituted “commission” for “department” in the introductory paragraph; and in (b), divided the former single sentence into the present first and second sentences by substituting “business for him. All managers must” for “business for him; must,” in the second sentence, substituted “department” for “commission,” inserted “prior to completing…on behalf of the permittee” and added “however, a felony…approval as a manager” at the end, and added the last sentence.

Cross References —

Temporary permit for those seeking to transfer either a package retailer’s permit or an on-premises retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Application of this section to the qualifications for a Class 1 or Class 2 Temporary retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Temporary, one-day permit authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-51.

Qualifications of applicants for permits to sell, etc., light wine and beer, see §§67-3-19,67-3-21.

Prohibition on manufacturers of light wine or beer acting as wholesalers or distributors, see §67-3-46.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Statute only applied to those seeking a permit; it did not apply where the business owner already had a solicitor’s permit and no other section of the code stated that the statute applied to maintaining the permit. D. J. Koenig & Assocs. v. Miss. State Tax Comm'n, 838 So. 2d 246, 2003 Miss. LEXIS 61 (Miss. 2003).

The licensing power for retail liquor permits is placed in the state tax commission, not the courts, and the commission is given a wide latitude and discretion in acting upon applications for such permits. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

No person has a vested right to have a license for the sale of intoxicating liquors issued to him, and qualifications prescribed by statute are construed as strict limitations on the granting of such licenses. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

Where another person who is himself disqualified from holding a license for operation of a retail liquor store has a financial interest in the premises or business and would dominate the applicant in operating the business, the license may be refused. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

The common law of agency is not the proper criterion to determine whether the state tax commission abused its discretion in refusing to issue a retail liquor dealer’s license, and the commission may satisfy itself as to whether the applicant or another will be or become the true and actual owner of the business for which the permit is sought. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

In determining whether to grant a retail liquor dealer’s license the state tax commission can consider the evidence and all reasonable inferences from it, and where the applicant for the license was a young woman college student whose father had previously been denied a license to operate a package store on the same premises by reason of his judgment indebtedness to the commission, that body could reasonably conclude that it was highly probable that the applicant, in the operation of the business, would be under the direction and control of her father. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. Moore, 209 So. 2d 832, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1476 (Miss. 1968).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Grant or renewal of liquor license as affected by fact that applicant held such license in the past. 2 A.L.R.2d 1239.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 114 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 146-148.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-59. “Applicant” defined.

Where the word “applicant” is used in Section 67-1-57 or in Sections 67-1-51, 67-1-53, 67-1-55 and 67-1-63, it shall also mean and include each member of a partnership, limited liability company or association and all officers and the owner or owners of the majority of the corporate stock of a corporation, as of the date of the application.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-23; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 23; Laws, 1968, ch. 591, § 1; Laws, 2006, ch. 529, § 11, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 3, 2006.).

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment inserted “limited liability company” following “member of a partnership,” and made a minor stylistic change.

Cross References —

Temporary, one-day permit authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-51.

Application of this section to the qualifications for a Class 1 or Class 2 temporary retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

Temporary permit for those seeking to transfer either a package retailer’s permit or an on-premises retailer’s permit, see §67-1-51.

§ 67-1-61. Validity, contents and display of permits.

All permits issued by the commission shall expire twelve months from date of issuance, and no permit shall be issued for a period longer than one year. Each permit shall state a class to which it belongs, the name of the permittee, the address of the premises for which granted, and the date of its expiration. All permits issued shall at all times be prominently displayed on the premises for which issued.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-21; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 21; ch. 649, § 16, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

Cross References —

Display of permits to sell, etc., light wine and beer, see §67-3-23.

§ 67-1-63. Permit renewals; continued operation after denial of renewal under certain circumstances; appeals.

  1. Any permittee may renew his permit at the expiration thereof for an additional term of one (1) year, provided he is then qualified to receive a permit and the premises for which the renewal is sought are suitable for such purposes. The renewal privilege herein provided for shall not be construed as a vested right. No “on-premises” retailer’s permit shall be renewed at the expiration thereof for any “hotel” or “restaurant” under this chapter unless the commission is satisfied that the holder thereof is continuing to meet the requirements of a hotel or restaurant, as defined in Section 67-1-5.
  2. When an application for the renewal of a permit has been denied by the department for a reason other than for being incomplete, for failure to pay any applicable license privilege taxes or fees required for renewal or for failure to post a bond, cash or securities as required by Section 27-71-21, the permittee shall be allowed to continue to operate under the permit for which renewal was denied until the last of the following dates:
    1. The date on which the permit expires;
    2. The date on which the time period for filing an appeal of the denial of the renewal to the Board of Tax Appeals expires;
    3. If the denial is timely appealed to the Board of Tax Appeals and this appeal is later withdrawn, the date on which the withdrawal of appeal occurs; or
    4. If the denial is timely appealed to the Board of Tax Appeals and an order is entered by the Board of Tax Appeals affirming the denial of the renewal, the date on which the permittee receives notice of the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals affirming the denial.Refusal to accept delivery of such notice or the posting of the final decision of the Board of Tax Appeals at the permitted place of business shall constitute receipt of notice by the permittee of this decision.
  3. If the denial of an application for renewal of a permit is appealed to the Board of Tax Appeals and the board reverses the denial of the application for renewal, the department shall renew and issue the permit from its last expiration date.
  4. The issuance and/or renewal of a permit based on the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals shall not bar or estop the department from appealing this decision of the Board of Tax Appeals to chancery court under Section 67-1-39.Any subsequent renewal of this permit while an appeal by the department from the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is pending shall be subject to the final decision of the court on this appeal.If in such an appeal by the department, a court enters a final decision and/or order reversing the decision of the board and affirming the denial of the application for a permit or the application for renewal of a permit, the permit, even if subsequently renewed, shall be deemed denied and not authorize the permittee to sell alcoholic beverages under that permit after the date on which the decision and/or order of the court affirming the denial of the permit becomes final and not subject to any further appeal.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-22; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 22; Laws, 1986, ch. 486, § 1; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 133, eff from and after July 1, 2010.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, designated the former provisions as (1); and added (2) through (4).

Cross References —

Board of tax appeals, see §27-4-1 et seq.

Annual privilege tax for permits, see §27-71-5.

Suspension and revocation of permits, see §67-1-71.

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Grant or renewal of liquor license as affected by fact that applicant held such license in the past. 2 A.L.R.2d 1239.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 139 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 201 et seq.

§ 67-1-65. Issuance of permits in counties having no incorporated municipality.

In any county having heretofore voted, or which hereafter votes, to come out from under the prohibition law, in which there is not located an incorporated municipality within such county, the state tax commission may issue package retailer’s permits in such county.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-23.5; Laws, 1968, ch. 595, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved June 27, 1968).

§ 67-1-67. Transfer of permit.

No permit shall be transferred by the permittee to any other person or any other place except with the written consent of the commission upon a regular application therefor in writing and upon consideration thereof as provided in this chapter for an original application for a permit. The commission shall not approve the transfer of the permit of any person against whom there is pending in the courts or before the commission any charge of keeping a disorderly house, or of violating this chapter or the laws against gambling in this state or against whom there is pending any proceedings for the revocation, suspension or cancellation of the permit.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-24; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 24, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

Cross References —

Transfer of light wine and beer permits, see §67-3-23.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Transfer of retail liquor license or permit from one location to another. 98 A.L.R.2d 1123.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 143 et seq.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 51-54 (transfer of licenses).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors § 209.

§ 67-1-69. Permittees must comply with federal statutes.

No person holding any permit issued under the provisions of this chapter shall engage in any business or activity authorized by such permit unless such person shall qualify so to do by complying with all statutes of the United States of America, and all regulations issued pursuant thereto, which are applicable or shall pertain to such business or activity, and shall continue to be so qualified at all times while engaging in such business or activity. As a prerequisite to the issuance of any permit under this chapter, the applicant shall first obtain the required federal occupational stamp for the type of business for which the permit has been approved by the commission.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-29; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 29, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

§ 67-1-71. Suspension and revocation of permits; reasonable notice of charges for which suspension or revocation is sought; hearing before Board of Tax Appeals; applicability of paragraph (i) to games or lotteries authorized by Mississippi lottery law.

The department may revoke or suspend any permit issued by it for a violation by the permittee of any of the provisions of this chapter or of the regulations promulgated under it by the department.

Permits must be revoked or suspended for the following causes:

Conviction of the permittee for the violation of any of the provisions of this chapter;

Willful failure or refusal by any permittee to comply with any of the provisions of this chapter or of any rule or regulation adopted pursuant thereto;

The making of any materially false statement in any application for a permit;

Conviction of one or more of the clerks, agents or employees of the permittee, of any violation of this chapter upon the premises covered by such permit within a period of time as designated by the rules or regulations of the department;

The possession on the premises of any retail permittee of any alcoholic beverages upon which the tax has not been paid;

The willful failure of any permittee to keep the records or make the reports required by this chapter, or to allow an inspection of such records by any duly authorized person;

The suspension or revocation of a permit issued to the permittee by the federal government, or conviction of violating any federal law relating to alcoholic beverages;

The failure to furnish any bond required by Section 27-71-21 within fifteen (15) days after notice from the department; and

The conducting of any form of illegal gambling on the premises of any permittee or on any premises connected therewith or the presence on any such premises of any gambling device with the knowledge of the permittee.

The provisions of paragraph (i) of this section shall not apply to gambling or the presence of any gambling devices, with knowledge of the permittee, on board a cruise vessel in the waters within the State of Mississippi, which lie adjacent to the State of Mississippi south of the three (3) most southern counties in the State of Mississippi, or on any vessel as defined in Section 27-109-1 whenever such vessel is on the Mississippi River or navigable waters within any county bordering on the Mississippi River. The department may, in its discretion, issue on-premises retailer’s permits to a common carrier of the nature described in this paragraph.

The provisions of paragraph (i) of this section shall not apply to the operation of any game or lottery authorized by Chapter 115, Title 27.

No permit shall be suspended or revoked until after the permittee has been provided reasonable notice of the charges against him for which suspension or revocation is sought and the opportunity to a hearing before the Board of Tax Appeals to contest such charges and the suspension or revocation proposed. Opportunity to a hearing is provided without an actual hearing if the permittee, after receiving reasonable notice, including notice of his right to a hearing, fails to timely request a hearing. The permittee may also at any time waive his rights to reasonable notice and/or to the opportunity to a hearing by agreeing to a suspension or revocation offered by the department. Notwithstanding the requirement above that a permit may not be suspended without notice and opportunity to a hearing, sales of alcoholic beverages by a permittee under a permit for which the bond under Section 27-71-21 has been cancelled shall be suspended from and after issuance of the notice provided in paragraph (h) above and shall continue to be suspended until the bond is reinstated, a new bond is posted or sufficient cash or securities as provided under Section 27-71-21 are deposited with the State Treasurer for this permit.

In addition to the causes specified in this section and other provisions of this chapter, the department shall be authorized to suspend the permit of any permit holder for being out of compliance with an order for support, as defined in Section 93-11-153. The procedure for suspension of a permit for being out of compliance with an order for support, and the procedure for the reissuance or reinstatement of a permit suspended for that purpose, and the payment of any fees for the reissuance or reinstatement of a permit suspended for that purpose, shall be governed by Section 93-11-157 or 93-11-163, as the case may be. If there is any conflict between any provision of Section 93-11-157 or 93-11-163 and any provision of this chapter, the provisions of Section 93-11-157 or 93-11-163, as the case may be, shall control.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-28; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 28; Laws, 1989, ch. 310, § 1; Laws, 1989, ch. 480, § 8; Laws, 1990, ch. 449, § 2; Laws, 1990, ch. 573, § 6; Laws, 1990 Ex Sess, ch. 45 § 146; Laws, 1992, ch. 459, § 2; Laws, 1996, ch. 507, § 17; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 134; Laws, 2010, ch. 388, § 13, eff from and after July 1, 2010; Laws, 2018, 1st Ex Sess, ch. 2, § 52, eff from and after September 1, 2018.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, substituted “department” for “commission” everywhere it appears in the first paragraph, in paragraphs (d) and (i), in the third-to-last paragraph, and in the last paragraph; and rewrote the next-to-last paragraph.

The 2010 amendment, in the second paragraph following (i), substituted “the bond under Section 27-71-21 has been cancelled shall be suspended from and after issuance of the notice” for “the bond shall be suspended under Section 27-71-21 has been cancelled from and after issuance of this notice.”

The 2018 1st Extraordinary Session amendment, effective September 1, 2018, in (i), added the third paragraph, and substituted “paragraph (h)” for subsection (h)” in the last sentence of the fourth paragraph.

Cross References —

Elected or appointed official not to derive any pecuniary benefit as result of duties under this section, and penalties therefor, see §25-4-119.

Licensing and regulation of cruise vessels, see §27-109-1 et seq.

Revocation or suspension of light wine and beer permits, see §§67-3-29 to67-3-41.

Mississippi Gaming Control Act, see §§75-76-1 et seq.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Validity of statute or rule which makes specified conduct or condition a ground for cancellation or suspension of license, irrespective of licensee’s personal fault. 3 A.L.R.2d 107.

Right to hearing before revocation or suspension of liquor license. 35 A.L.R.2d 1067.

Revocation or suspension of liquor license because of drinking or drunkenness on part of licensee or business associates. 36 A.L.R.3d 1301.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 143 et seq.

1A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Administrative Law, Form 341.2 (complaint, petition, or declaration – by license holder – against administrative agency – to enjoin further proceedings to suspend or revoke license – attempt to suspend or revoke license on grounds not listed in statute authorizing suspension or revocation of license).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 61-84 (revocation or suspension of licenses).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 222 et seq.

§ 67-1-72. Appeal to Board of Tax Appeals from certain actions of the Department of Revenue; notice of hearing; order.

  1. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, any applicant or holder of a permit issued under this chapter which is aggrieved by an action of the Department of Revenue to deny his application for a permit, to deny the renewal of his permit or to revoke or suspend his permit shall be allowed to appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals from this action. This appeal is to be filed by the aggrieved person with the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals, with a copy being sent to the Department of Revenue, within fifteen (15) days from the date that person received notice of the action of the department being aggrieved. If the person aggrieved fails to appeal within this fifteen-day period, the action of the Department of Revenue shall take effect as set out in the notice. The Department of Revenue retains the authority to change at any time the action aggrieved to in an appeal under this subsection. The applicant or holder of any permit issued under this chapter may waive his right to notice and opportunity to a hearing as provided by this subsection and agree to the action being taken by the department. The inability of the Department of Revenue to issue or renew a permit due to an incomplete application or due to the failure of the applicant to pay the annual privilege taxes and fees provided by Section 27-71-5 and/or the failure of the applicant to post or deposit the bond, cash or securities as required by Section 27-71-21 shall not constitute a denial for purposes of this subsection.
  2. Any applicant for approval as a manager of an establishment operating under a permit issued under this chapter or who holds the designation of an approved manager of an establishment operating under a permit issued under this chapter and who is aggrieved by an action of the Department of Revenue to deny his application for approval as a manager or to revoke or suspend his designation as an approved manager shall be allowed to appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals from this action. This appeal is to be filed by the aggrieved person with the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals, with a copy being sent to the Department of Revenue, within fifteen (15) days from the date that person received notice of the action of the department being aggrieved. If the person aggrieved fails to appeal within this fifteen-day period, the action of the Department of Revenue shall take effect as set out in the notice. The Department of Revenue retains the authority to change at any time the action aggrieved to in an appeal under this subsection. The applicant or holder of an approved manager designation may waive his right to notice and opportunity to a hearing as provided by this subsection and agree to the action being taken by the department. The inability of the Department of Revenue to consider an application for approval of an applicant as a manager due to an incomplete application shall not constitute a denial of the application for purposes of this subsection.
  3. Any applicant for approval of an area or locality as a qualified resort area under this chapter who is aggrieved by the decision of the Department of Revenue to deny the qualified resort area as requested and any county or municipality wherein the proposed qualified resort area is located may appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals from such decision. This appeal is to be filed by the aggrieved applicant or by the affected county or municipality with the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals, with a copy being sent to the Department of Revenue, within fifteen (15) days from the date that the person or entity filing the appeal received notice of the decision of the Department of Revenue to deny the qualified resort area. If an appeal is not filed within this fifteen-day period, the decision of the Department of Revenue shall become final. The Department of Revenue retains the authority to change at any time the decision aggrieved to in an appeal under this subsection. The inability of the Department of Revenue to consider an application for the approval of an area or locality as a qualified resort area due to an incomplete application shall not constitute a denial of that application for purposes of this subsection.
  4. Any person, including any county or municipality in which the qualified resort area is located, who is aggrieved by the decision of the Department of Revenue to revoke the approval of an area or locality as a qualified resort area may appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals from such decision. This appeal is to be filed by the aggrieved person with the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals, with a copy being sent to the Department of Revenue, within fifteen (15) days from the date that the person or entity filing the appeal received notice of the decision of the department to revoke approval of the qualified resort area. At the discretion of the Department of Revenue, in addition to any other notice to be provided under this subsection, the department may provide notice of its decision to revoke approval of the qualified resort area by publication in the same manner as provided by regulation when approval of a qualified resort area is sought. In regard to such publication, the fifteen-day period provided herein will begin on the date that notice is first published. If an appeal is not filed within this fifteen-day period, the decision of the Department of Revenue shall become final. The Department of Revenue retains the authority to change at any time the decision aggrieved to in an appeal under this subsection.
  5. Any person objecting to an application for the issuance or transfer of a permit, other than a temporary retailer’s permit, issued under this chapter and who timely requests in writing a hearing on his objection shall be given a hearing before the Board of Tax Appeals unless the permit is denied by the Department of Revenue and an appeal is not taken by the applicant to the Board of Tax Appeals from that denial or the applicant withdraws his application. Any written request for a hearing on an objection must be filed with the Department of Revenue within fifteen (15) days from the first date of publication of the notice of such application under Section 67-1-53. If the department determines that the permit should be denied, notice will be provided to the applicant as set out in subsection (1) of this section, and if the applicant timely requests a hearing on the denial as provided by this subsection (5), the department will advise the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals and the applicant of the written request for a hearing on an objection to the permit. The hearing on the objection to the permit and the hearing on the appeal by the applicant from the denial of the department of the application shall be consolidated and heard by the Board of Tax Appeals at the same time. If the department determines that the permit should be issued, the department will advise the applicant and the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals of the timely written request for a hearing on an objection to the application and a hearing will be set before the Board of Tax Appeals on this objection. If prior to the hearing, either the person requesting the hearing withdraws his request or the applicant withdraws his application, the hearing will be cancelled and the objection proceedings before the Board of Tax Appeals on the application will be dismissed as moot. In the case of such withdrawals, the Board of Tax Appeals is authorized to assess to either or both parties any costs incurred by it prior to such withdrawal. The Department of Revenue retains authority to issue the permit to the applicant where the person objecting to the application withdraws his request for a hearing.
  6. Any person objecting to an application for approval by the Department of Revenue of a area or locality as a qualified resort area under this chapter and who timely requests in writing a hearing on his objection shall be given a hearing before the Board of Tax Appeals unless approval of the application is denied by the Department of Revenue and an appeal is not taken by the applicant or the county or municipality in which the proposed qualified resort area is located to the Board of Tax Appeals from that denial or the applicant withdraws his application. Any written request for a hearing on an objection must be filed with the Department of Revenue within fifteen (15) days from the first date of publication of the notice of such application as provided by regulation. If the department determines that the application for approval of the proposed area or locality as a qualified resort area should be denied, the department will proceed with denial of such application as set out in subsection (3) of this section, and if the applicant or the county or municipality in which the proposed qualified resort area is located timely requests a hearing on the denial as provided by subsection (3) of this section, the department will advise the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals and the applicant of the written request for a hearing on an objection to the application. The hearing on the objection to approval of the proposed qualified resort area and the hearing on the appeal from the denial of the department of the application for such approval shall be consolidated and heard by the Board of Tax Appeals at the same time. If the department determines that the proposed qualified resort area should be approved, the department will advise the applicant and the Executive Director of the Board of Tax Appeals of the timely written request for a hearing on an objection to the application and a hearing will be set before the Board of Tax Appeals on this objection. If prior to the hearing, either the person requesting the hearing withdraws his request or the applicant withdraws his application, the hearing will be cancelled and the objection proceedings before the Board of Tax Appeals on the application will be dismissed as moot. In the case of such withdrawals, the Board of Tax Appeals is authorized to assess to either or both parties any costs incurred by it prior to such withdrawal. The Department of Revenue retains authority to approve the proposed area or locality as a qualified resort area where the person objecting to the application withdraws his request for a hearing.
  7. Any person having an interest in any alcoholic beverages, light wine, beer or raw materials which the Department of Revenue intends to dispose of under Section 67-1-18 shall be given reasonable notice of this proposed disposal, and upon such notice, this person may request a hearing before the Board of Tax Appeals to establish his right or claim to this property. This request for a hearing shall be filed with the Board of Tax Appeals, with a copy sent to the Department of Revenue, within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of the notice provided above by the person filing the request. If a request is not received by the Board of Tax Appeals within this fifteen-day period, the department may order the property disposed of in accordance with Section 67-1-18.
  8. Upon receipt of a written request for hearing or appeal as set out above, the executive director shall schedule a hearing before the Board of Tax Appeals on this request or appeal. A notice of the hearing shall be mailed to all persons or entities having an interest in the matter being heard which shall always include the person or entity filing the request or appeal for which the hearing is being set, the applicant or holder of any permit, approved manager status or qualified resort area status in issue, any person who filed a written request for a hearing on an objection to any application in issue and the Department of Revenue. This notice shall provide the date, time and location of the hearing. Mailing to the attorney representing a person or entity in the matter being heard shall be the same as mailing to the person or entity the attorney represents. Failure of the person or entity on whose request or appeal the matter was set for hearing to appear personally or through his designated representative at the hearing shall constitute an involuntary withdrawal of his request or appeal. Upon such withdrawal, the Board of Tax Appeals shall note on the record the failure of the person or entity to appear at the hearing and shall dismiss the request or appeal and remand the matter back to the Department of Revenue for appropriate action.
  9. At any hearing before the Board of Tax Appeals on an appeal or hearing request as set out above, two (2) members of the Board of Tax Appeals shall constitute a quorum. At the hearing, the Board of Tax Appeals shall try the issues presented according to law and the facts and pursuant to any guidelines established by regulation. The rules of evidence shall be relaxed at the hearing and the hearing shall be recorded by a court reporter. After reaching a decision on the issues presented, the Board of Tax Appeals shall enter an order setting forth its findings and decision in the matter. A copy of the order of the Board of Tax Appeals shall be mailed to the person or entity filing the request or appeal which was heard, the applicant or holder of any permit, approved manager status or qualified resort area status in issue, any person who filed a written request for a hearing on an objection to any application in issue and the Department of Revenue to notify them of the findings and decision of the Board of Tax Appeals.

HISTORY: Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 135; Laws, 2010, ch. 388, § 14; Laws, 2015, ch. 438, § 3, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 13, 2015).

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected a statutory reference in the third sentence in subsection (5) by substituting “this subsection (5)” for the second occurrence of “subsection (1) of this section.” The Joint Committee ratified the correction at its July 22, 2010, meeting.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2010 amendment, in the second sentence in (1), substituted “within fifteen (15) days from the date that person received notice of the action” for “within fifteen (15) days of the date to that person received notice of the action”; in the third sentence in (5), substituted “as provided by subsection (1) of this section” for “as provided by this subsection (1)”; and in the second sentence in (6), substituted “publication of the notice of such application” for “publication on the notice of such application.”

The 2015 amendment inserted “light wine, beer” in the first sentence of (7).

Cross References —

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Board of tax appeals, see §27-4-1 et seq.

§ 67-1-73. Records and reports; penalty.

Every manufacturer, including native wine producers, within or without the state, and every other shipper of alcoholic beverages who sells any alcoholic beverage, including native wine, within the state, shall, at the time of making such sale, file with the commission a copy of the invoice of such sale showing in detail the kind of alcoholic beverage sold, the quantities of each, the size of the container and the weight of the contents, the alcoholic content, and the name and address of the person to whom sold.

Every person transporting alcoholic beverages, including native wine, within this state to a point within this state, whether such transportation originates within or without this state, shall, within five (5) days after delivery of such shipment, furnish the commission a copy of the bill of lading or receipt, showing the name or consignor or consignee, date, place received, destination, and quantity of alcoholic beverages delivered. Upon failure to comply with the provisions of this section, such person shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in the sum of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for each offense.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-30; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 30; Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 19, eff from and after passage (approved May 25, 1976).

Cross References —

Native Wines Law, see §§67-5-1 et seq.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

§ 67-1-75. Offenses by holder of package retailer’s permit or by employee thereof; penalty.

If the holder of a package retailer’s permit, or any employee thereof:

Shall sell, offer for sale or permit to be sold in, on or about the premises covered by such permit any alcoholic beverages except in the original sealed and unopened packages; or

Shall permit the drinking or consumption of any alcoholic beverages in, on or about the premises covered by such permit except as may be otherwise authorized by this chapter; or

Shall sell, offer for sale or permit the sale in, on or about the premises of alcoholic beverages in any package or container containing less than fifty (50) milliliters by liquid measure; then such person or employee shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment in the county jail for a term of not more than one (1) year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court. In addition, in the case of the commission of any of such offenses by the holder of a permit, it shall be the duty of the commission forthwith to revoke the permit held by such person and conviction of the criminal offense shall not be a condition precedent to such revocation.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-25; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 25; Laws, 1977, ch. 418; Laws, 1988, ch. 383, § 3; Laws, 2014, ch. 516, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 2014.

Amendment Notes —

The 2014 amendment added “except as may be otherwise authorized by this chapter” near the end of (b).

Cross References —

Seizure without process of property subject to forfeiture because of unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

Rule making it unlawful to sell intoxicating liquor, see §97-31-27.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 276 et seq.

1A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Administrative Law, Form 341.2 (complaint, petition, or declaration – by license holder – against administrative agency – to enjoin further proceedings to suspend or revoke license – attempt to suspend or revoke license on grounds not listed in statute authorizing suspension or revocation of license).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 311 et seq., 380.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-77. Financial interest prohibition; exceptions; penalty.

  1. It shall be unlawful for the holder of a manufacturer’s or wholesaler’s permit, or anyone connected with the business of such holder, or for any other distiller, wine manufacturer, rectifier, blender or bottler, to have any financial interest in any premises upon which any alcoholic beverage is sold at retail by any permittee, or in the business conducted by such permittee, except that:
    1. The holder of a manufacturer’s or wholesaler’s permit may contract for the service of a representative in the area of governmental affairs on a part-time basis with a holder of an on-premises permit.
    2. A distiller, wine manufacturer, rectifier, blender or bottler may have a financial interest in a premises upon which alcoholic beverages are sold at retail by a permittee, or in the business conducted by a permittee, if the permittee does not sell or serve any alcoholic beverages that are distilled, manufactured, rectified, blended or bottled by the distiller, wine manufacturer, rectifier, blender or bottler having the financial interest in the premises or in the business conducted by a permittee.
    3. A distiller, wine manufacturer, rectifier, blender or bottler may have a financial interest in and possess a distillery retailer’s permit.
  2. It shall also be unlawful for any such person, or anyone connected with his, its, or their business to lend any money or make any gift or offer any gratuity, to any retail permittee, except as authorized by regulations of the commission, to the holder of any retail permit issued under the provisions of this chapter. Except as above provided, no retail permittee shall accept, receive, or make use of any money or gift furnished by any such person, or become indebted to such person except for the purchase of alcoholic beverages.
  3. The commission shall not prohibit the furnishing of advertising specialties, printed materials, or other things having nominal value to a retail permittee. This section shall not be construed to prohibit the possession by any person of advertising specialties, printed materials, or other things having nominal value furnished by a retail permittee.
  4. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or by imprisonment for not more than two (2) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-26; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 26; Laws, 1985, ch. 422; Laws, 1986, ch. 450, § 2; Laws, 1989, ch. 361, § 1; Laws, 2007, ch. 302, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved Jan. 31, 2007); Laws, 2018, ch. 453, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2018.

Editor's Notes —

Laws of 2018, ch. 453, § 5, provides:

“SECTION 5. Sections 1 and 3 of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after the passage of this act [April 13, 2018] and the remainder of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after July 1, 2018.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2007 amendment, redesignated former (1), as present (1) and (1)(a); added “except that” at the end of (1)(a) and added (1)(b).

The 2018 amendment deleted “brewer” preceding “rectifier” once in the introductory paragraph of (1) and twice in (1)(b), and deleted “brewed” preceding “rectified” in (1)(b); and added (1)(c).

Cross References —

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to court imposed fines or other penalties for misdemeanors and felonies, see §99-19-73.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 94.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 297, 298.

§ 67-1-79. Credit to retailers prohibited.

No alcoholic beverage shall be sold by any wholesaler to any retailer, nor shall any retailer purchase any alcoholic beverage, except for cash. Each delivery of any alcoholic beverage to a retail permittee shall be accompanied by an invoice of sale or delivery slip which shall bear as its date the date of delivery of such alcoholic beverage.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-27; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 27, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

Cross References —

Prohibition of credit to retailers of light wine and beer, see §67-3-45.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 94.

CJS.

48A C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 695-698.

§ 67-1-81. Sales to minors prohibited; penalties.

  1. Any permittee or other person who shall sell, furnish, dispose of, give, or cause to be sold, furnished, disposed of, or given, any alcoholic beverage to any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) nor more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for a first offense. For a second or subsequent offense, such permittee or other person shall be punished by a fine of not less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) nor more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00), or by imprisonment for not more than one (1) year, or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court. Upon conviction of a second offense under the provisions of this section the permit of any permittee so convicted shall be automatically and permanently revoked.
  2. Any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years who purchases, receives, or has in his or her possession in any public place, any alcoholic beverages, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not less than Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00). Provided, that clearing or busing tables that have glasses or other containers that contain or did contain alcoholic beverages, or stocking, bagging or otherwise handling purchases of alcoholic beverages shall not be deemed possession of alcoholic beverages for the purposes of this section. Provided further, that a person who is at least eighteen (18) years of age but under the age of twenty-one (21) years who waits on tables by taking orders for or delivering orders of alcoholic beverages shall not be deemed to unlawfully possess or furnish alcoholic beverages if in the scope of his employment by the holder of an on-premises retailer’s permit. This exception shall not authorize a person under the age of twenty-one (21) to tend bar or act in the capacity of bartender. Any person under the age of twenty-one (21) who knowingly makes a false statement to the effect that he or she is twenty-one (21) years old or older or presents any document that indicates he or she is twenty-one (21) years of age or older for the purpose of purchasing alcoholic beverages from any person engaged in the sale of alcoholic beverages shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not less than Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), and a sentence to not more than thirty (30) days’ community service.
  3. The term “community service” as used in this section shall mean work, projects or services for the benefit of the community assigned, supervised and recorded by appropriate public officials.
  4. If a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years is convicted or enters a plea of guilty of purchasing, receiving or having in his or her possession in any public place any alcoholic beverages in violation of subsection (2) of this section, the trial judge, in lieu of the penalties otherwise provided under subsection (2) of this section, shall suspend the minor’s driver’s license by taking and keeping it in the custody of the court for a period of time not to exceed ninety (90) days. The judge so ordering the suspension shall enter upon his docket “DEFENDANT’S DRIVER’S LICENSE SUSPENDED FOR_______________DAYS IN LIEU OF CONVICTION” and such action by the trial judge shall not constitute a conviction. During the period that the minor’s driver’s license is suspended, the trial judge shall suspend the imposition of any fines or penalties that may be imposed under subsection (2) of this section and may place the minor on probation subject to such conditions as the judge deems appropriate. If the minor violates any of the conditions of probation, then the trial judge shall return the driver’s license to the minor and impose the fines, penalties or both, that he would have otherwise imposed, and such action shall constitute a conviction.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-31; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 31; Laws, 1979, ch. 380; Laws, 1992, ch. 460, § 1; Laws, 2009, ch. 350, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2009.

Amendment Notes —

The 2009 amendment, in the last sentence of (2), inserted “or presents any document that indicates he or she is twenty-one (21) years of age or older for the purpose of purchasing alcoholic beverages from,” deleted “for the purpose of obtaining the same” preceding “shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,” and made a minor stylistic change.

Cross References —

Definition of term “minor,” see §1-3-27.

Seizure without process of property subject to forfeiture because of unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

Prohibition against sale of light wine or beer to persons under the age of 21, see §67-3-53.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Although Mississippi statutes relating to the sale of alcoholic beverages have sometimes been referred to as the Mississippi Dram Shop Law, such references are misleading because true dram shop acts are civil liability acts wherein the legislature specifically imposes liability on the seller of intoxicating liquors when a third party is injured as a result of the intoxication of the buyer where the sale caused or contributed to such intoxication. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

Society has a greater interest in protecting the welfare of minors than other groups listed in §§67-3-53(b),67-1-81 and67-1-83, because minors comprise a larger segment of society than do the others listed, and the future of society is dependent upon the welfare and protection of its youth. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Since possession of alcohol or light wine or beer by a minor is not a delinquent act, the youth court does not have original jurisdiction over such offenses. Wiggins, Sept. 19, 2003, A.G. Op. 03-0424.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Criminal offense of selling liquor to a minor or permitting him to stay on licensed premises as affected by ignorance or mistake regarding his age. 12 A.L.R.3d 991.

Serving liquor to minor in home as unlawful sale or gift. 14 A.L.R.3d 1186.

Civil Damages Act: liability of one who furnishes liquor to another for consumption by third parties, for injury to or damage caused by consumer. 64 A.L.R.3d 922.

What constitutes violation of enactment prohibiting sale of intoxicating liquor to minor. 89 A.L.R.3d 1256.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 220 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 345-350.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-83. Other prohibited sales; penalty.

  1. It shall be unlawful for any permittee or other person to sell or furnish any alcoholic beverage to any person who is visibly intoxicated, or to any person who is known to habitually drink alcoholic beverages to excess, or to any person who is known to be an habitual user of narcotics or other habit-forming drugs. It shall also be unlawful for the holder of any package retailer’s permit to sell any alcoholic beverages except by delivery in person to the purchaser at the place of business of the permittee.
  2. It shall be unlawful for any permittee or other person to sell or furnish any alcoholic beverage to any person to whom the commission has, after investigation, decided to prohibit the sale of those beverages because of an appeal to the commission so to do by the husband, wife, father, mother, brother, sister, child, or employer of the person. The interdiction in those cases shall last until removed by the commission, but no person shall be held to have violated this subsection unless he has been informed by the commission, by registered letter, that it is forbidden to sell to that individual or unless that fact is otherwise known to the permittee or other person.
  3. It shall be unlawful for any holder of a package retailer’s permit, or any employee or agent thereof, engaged solely in the business of package retail sales under this chapter to sell or furnish any alcoholic beverage before 10:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. or to sell alcoholic beverages on Sunday and Christmas Day.
  4. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the county jail for a term of not more than six (6) months or by both that fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court. In addition, the commission shall immediately revoke the permit of any permittee who violates the provisions of this section.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-32; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 32; Laws, 1972, ch. 508, § 1; Laws, 1977, ch. 485; Laws, 1986, ch. 486, § 2; Laws, 1989, ch. 384, § 2; Laws, 2008, ch. 442, § 18, eff from and after July 1, 2008.

Amendment Notes —

The 2008 amendment deleted “to any person who is known to be insane or mentally defective, or” following “furnish any alcoholic beverage” in the first sentence of (1); substituted “shall immediately revoke” for “shall forthwith revoke” near the end of (4); and made minor stylistic changes throughout.

Cross References —

Seizure without process of property subject to forfeiture because of unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

Immunity from liability of persons who lawfully furnished or sold intoxicating beverages to one causing damage, see §67-3-73.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

2. No liability.

1. In general.

Prohibition in Mississippi’s dram shop statute created liability for the permit holder and any employees of the permit holder, and the parent company, as the sole shareholder of the permit holder, the casino owner, was neither; the family failed to allege any facts to suggest that the corporation had either disregarded corporate formalities or used the corporate form to commit misfeasance, and thus the family did not assert a viable claim against the parent company as required by Miss. R. Civ. P. 12(b). Penn Nat'l Gaming v. Ratliff, 2007 Miss. LEXIS 1 (Miss. Jan. 4, 2007), op. withdrawn, sub. op., 954 So. 2d 427, 2007 Miss. LEXIS 229 (Miss. 2007).

There was no indication that the decedent (an adult), was visibly intoxicated in the terms of Miss. Code Ann. §§67-1-83(1),67-3-53, and67-3-73. The transcripts of the casino’s security cameras evidenced that while she drank and gambled, she was ambulatory and conversational and there was nothing in the record to raise a question of fact as to the possibility that she was a habitual drunkard, or known to be insane or mentally defective, in the terms of Miss. Code Ann. §§67-1-83(1) and67-3-53(b); accordingly, summary judgment for the casino was proper. Estate of White v. Rainbow Casino-Vicksburg P'ship, 910 So. 2d 713, 2005 Miss. App. LEXIS 192 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005).

There was no indication that the decedent (an adult), was visibly intoxicated, as defined in Miss. Code Ann. §§67-1-83(1),67-3-53, and67-3-73. The transcripts of the casino’s security cameras evidenced that while she drank and gambled, she was ambulatory and conversational and there was nothing in the record to raise a question of fact as to the possibility that she was a habitual drunkard, or known to be insane or mentally defective, as defined in Miss. Code Ann. §§67-1-83(1) and67-3-53(b); accordingly, summary judgment for the casino was proper. Estate of White v. Rainbow Casino-Vicksburg P'ship, 910 So. 2d 713, 2005 Miss. App. LEXIS 192 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005).

Customer who suffered injuries after voluntarily consuming alcohol is not part of the protected class of Miss. Code Ann. §67-3-73; therefore, a casino’s motion to dismiss a negligence action was properly granted since there was no liability under either §67-3-73 or Miss. Code Ann. §67-1-83. Bridges v. Park Place Entm't, Inc., 860 So. 2d 811, 2003 Miss. LEXIS 758 (Miss. 2003).

One selling alcohol on the premises, though not an insurer of its guest’s safety, has a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect its patrons from reasonably foreseeable injury at the hands of another. Grisham v. John Q. Long V.F.W. Post, No. 4057, Inc., 519 So. 2d 413, 1988 Miss. LEXIS 12 (Miss. 1988).

A dispenser of intoxicants is not liable to an adult individual who voluntarily consumes intoxicants and then, by reason of his inebriated condition, injures himself. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986); Gregg v. Four Squires, Ltd., 498 So. 2d 362, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2783 (Miss. 1986).

Society has a greater interest in protecting the welfare of minors than other groups listed in §§67-3-53(b),67-1-81 and67-1-83, because minors comprise a larger segment of society than do the others listed, and the future of society is dependent upon the welfare and protection of its youth. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

The public, for example, a third-party class whether minor or adult, is protected under the statute from the negligent acts of an intoxicated person, and has a claim against a person or business furnishing alcoholic beverages in violation of the statute. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

Although Mississippi statutes relating to the sale of alcoholic beverages have sometimes been referred to as the Mississippi Dram Shop Law, such references are misleading because true dram shop acts are civil liability acts wherein the legislature specifically imposes liability on the seller of intoxicating liquors when a third party is injured as a result of the intoxication of the buyer where the sale caused or contributed to such intoxication. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

Host who provides alcoholic beverage to visibly intoxicated social guest is not liable when guest subsequently causes automobile collision as result of intoxication. Boutwell v. Sullivan, 469 So. 2d 526, 1985 Miss. LEXIS 2069 (Miss. 1985).

An indictment or affidavit for a violation of a local option law must clearly aver facts showing that the offense was committed in a county or locality where such law was in effect. Benward v. State, 308 So. 2d 94, 1975 Miss. LEXIS 1844 (Miss. 1975).

A state statute under which various persons, by forbidding in writing the sale or gift of intoxicating liquors to one who, by excessive drinking, produced described conditions or exhibited certain traits, such as exposing himself or his family to want or becoming a danger to the peace of the community, could cause a notice to be posted in local retail liquor outlets prohibiting sales or gifts of liquor to the named person, was violative of procedural due process because of failure to provide for advance notice of such posting and an opportunity to be heard, such posting being to many a stigma or badge of disgrace, exposing an individual to public embarrassment and ridicule. Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 U.S. 433, 91 S. Ct. 507, 27 L. Ed. 2d 515, 1971 U.S. LEXIS 90 (U.S. 1971).

2. No liability.

Accident victim’s claims against a bar failed because the drunk driver testified at his deposition that he was not served any alcohol by any employee of the bar and did not recall purchasing any “set ups” that night. A bartender testified that she did not see any employee serve the driver any beer that night. Pontillo v. Warehouse Bar & Grill, L.L.C., 19 So.3d 797, 2009 Miss. App. LEXIS 701 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009).

Parent company of an alcohol permit holder should have been dismissed from a personal injury case because it was not liable under Miss. Code Ann. §67-1-83 since it was not a permit holder itself or an employee of such; moreover, the pleadings did not adequately state a claim showing that the corporate veil should have been pierced. Penn Nat'l Gaming, Inc. v. Ratliff, 954 So. 2d 427, 2007 Miss. LEXIS 229 (Miss. 2007).

There was no indication that the decedent (an adult), was visibly intoxicated, as defined in Miss. Code Ann. §§67-1-83(1),67-3-53, and67-3-73. The transcripts of the casino’s security cameras evidenced that while she drank and gambled, she was ambulatory and conversational and there was nothing in the record to raise a question of fact as to the possibility that she was a habitual drunkard, or known to be insane or mentally defective, as defined in Miss. Code Ann. §§67-1-83(1) and67-3-53(b); accordingly, summary judgment for the casino was proper. Estate of White v. Rainbow Casino-Vicksburg P'ship, 910 So. 2d 713, 2005 Miss. App. LEXIS 192 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Admissibility, in prosecution for illegal sale of intoxicating liquor, of other sales. 40 A.L.R.2d 817.

Sale and use of intoxicating liquors at public dance as nuisance. 44 A.L.R.2d 1401.

Contributory negligence allegedly contributing to cause of injury as defense in Civil Damages Act proceeding. 64 A.L.R.3d 849.

Proof of causation of intoxication as a prerequisite to recovery under Civil Damage Act. 64 A.L.R.3d 882.

Civil Damages Act: liability of one who furnishes liquor to another for consumption by third parties, for injury to or damage caused by consumer. 64 A.L.R.3d 922.

Recovery under Civil Damage (Dram Shop) Act for intangibles such as mental anguish, embarrassment, loss of affection or companionship, or the like. 78 A.L.R.3d 1199.

Common-law right of action for damage sustained by plaintiff in consequence of sale or gift of intoxicating liquor or habit-forming drug to another. 97 A.L.R.3d 528.

Liability of persons furnishing intoxicating liquor for injury to or death of consumer, outside coverage of civil damage acts. 98 A.L.R.3d 1230.

Choice of law as to liability of liquor seller for injuries caused by intoxicated person. 2 A.L.R.4th 952.

Social host’s liability for injuries incurred by third parties as a result of intoxicated guest’s negligence. 62 A.L.R.4th 16.

Validity, construction, and effect of statute limiting amount recoverable in dram shop action. 78 A.L.R.4th 542.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 216 et seq.

3 Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Automobiles and Highway Traffic, Form 299.1 (Head-on collision – Intoxicated driver driving in wrong direction – By decedent’s representative – Against tavern).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 151 et seq. (civil incidents and liabilities).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Form 151.1 (complaint, petition, or declaration – against liquor dealer – wrongful death – defendant driver intoxicated).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Form 167.1 (Complaint, petition, or declaration – Against sponsor of function where alcohol was served – Collision between intoxicated attendee and another car – For personal injuries).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Form 181.1 (Complaint, petition, or declaration – Against liquor dealer – Death caused by illegal sale of intoxicating liquor – Automobile collision – Another form).

32 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 2d 357, Tavern Keeper’s Liability Under Dramshop Act.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 341 et seq.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-1-85. Regulation of advertising and display of alcoholic beverages.

  1. The holder of a package retailer’s permit may have signs, lighted or otherwise, on the outside of the premises covered by his permit which advertise, announce or advise of the sale of alcoholic beverages in or on said premises. Wherever the sign is located on the premises, the name of the business shall also include the permit number thereof, preceded by the words “A.B.C. Permit No.”
  2. It shall be lawful to advertise alcoholic beverages by means of signs, billboards or displays on or along any road, highway, street or building.
  3. It shall be lawful for publishers, broadcasters and other kinds, types or forms of public and private advertising media to advertise alcoholic beverages; however, no alcoholic beverages may be advertised during, or within five (5) minutes preceding or following, any television broadcast which consists primarily of animated material intended for viewing by young children.
  4. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section to the contrary, it shall be unlawful to advertise alcoholic beverages by means of signs, billboards or displays in any municipality, county or judicial district which has not voted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter to legalize the sale of alcoholic beverages.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-33; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 33; Laws, 1968, ch. 592, § 1; Laws, 1971, ch. 350, § 1; Laws, 1982, ch. 419; Laws, 1986, ch. 450, § 1; Laws, 1988, ch. 562, § 2; Laws, 1990, ch. 569, § 5; Laws, 2017, ch. 393, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2017.

Amendment Notes —

The 2017 amendment rewrote (4), which read: “Notwithstanding the provisions of this section to the contrary, it shall be unlawful for any advertisement of alcoholic beverages to originate in any municipality, county or judicial district which has not voted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter to legalize the sale of alcoholic beverages, and it shall also be unlawful in such municipalities, counties and judicial districts to advertise alcoholic beverages by means of signs, billboards or displays”; and made minor stylistic changes.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Validity, construction, and effect of statutes, ordinances, or regulations prohibiting or regulating advertising of intoxicating liquors. 20 A.L.R.4th 600.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 196-199.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 293 et seq.

§ 67-1-87. General penalty provision.

  1. Any person convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this chapter for which no other penalty is specifically provided herein shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), or by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
  2. Any person convicted of a violation of any rules or regulations promulgated by the commission under the authority of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty to be assessed by the commission in an amount not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) to be deposited into the State General Fund.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-38; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 38; Laws, 1992, ch. 459, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 1992.

Cross References —

Effect of any member of a board, commission, council or authority changing domicile after appointment, see §7-13-9.

Criminal penalties for violating general prohibition laws, see §§97-31-27 et seq.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court-imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Recovery of cumulative statutory penalties. 71 A.L.R.2d 986.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 338 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 401 et seq.

§ 67-1-89. Injunctive relief.

In addition to any other rights and remedies which it may have, the commission, in the name of the chairman thereof, shall have the right to resort to and apply for injunctive relief, both temporary and permanent, in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce compliance with the provisions of this chapter and to restrain and prevent violations and threatened violations thereof. The Attorney General, district attorneys and county attorneys of this state, shall aid and assist the commission in all such actions when requested by the chairman so to do.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10265-34; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, § 34, eff from and after July 1, 1966.

Cross References —

Seizure without process of property subject to forfeiture because of unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 359 et seq.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Form 134 (order granting preliminary injunction against selling liquor on premises).

CJS.

48A C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 601 et seq.

§ 67-1-91. Enforcement.

  1. It is hereby made the duty of every police and peace officer and every district and county attorney and the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the State Tax Commission to enforce the provisions of this chapter and to inform against and diligently prosecute persons whom they have reasonable cause to believe to be offenders against the provisions thereof. Every such officer refusing or neglecting to do so shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and the court, in addition to imposing the penalty therefor, shall adjudge forfeiture of his office.
  2. In any county or municipality where it is readily apparent that local law enforcement authorities in cooperation with the agents and inspectors provided by the commission cannot control the illegal sale of alcoholic beverages, the commission shall request such assistance as it may deem necessary from the Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol; and it shall be the duty of the Governor of the State of Mississippi to see that the laws of the state are properly enforced by use of the additional authority as herein provided.
  3. The officers, agents and representatives of the State Tax Commission and the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division thereof are authorized and directed to strictly enforce the prohibition laws throughout the state, except in those counties and municipalities which have voted for the legalized sale of intoxicating liquor. The State Highway Patrol, sheriffs, police departments, constables, and all peace officers, and prosecuting attorneys, the Attorney General’s office, district attorneys, county attorneys, city attorneys, and all others charged with upholding the law, as well as the citizenry of this state, are hereby urged and directed to uphold the dignity of the law, to foster public respect therefor and to strictly enforce the laws against intoxicating liquor in all cases while operating a motor vehicle on the streets and highways of this state, and to enforce the law and prosecute against the wrongful use of intoxicating liquor in any county or municipality by a permit holder or licensee or anyone else under such circumstances and conditions as would lead to a breakdown in public law or is violative of the public sense of common decency, as well as to enforce the law against gambling, organized crime, or social vice and corruption.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10265-03, 10265-11, 10265-37; Laws, 1966, ch. 540, §§ 3, 11, 37; Laws, 1990, ch. 569, § 6, eff from and after passage (approved April 9, 1990).

Cross References —

Authority of officers to seize property subject to forfeiture for unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, see §67-1-17.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Where the ABC Division had been informed by a trusted former employee that he had personally seen the defendant, who had been repeatedly convicted of violating the prohibition laws, enter a liquor package store empty-handed and had personally seen him depart therefrom with a brown bag full of purchases, and agents did not attempt to stop the defendant in Hinds County which is wet, but attempted to stop him and to check his purchases on a road in Rakin County which is dry, there was probable cause for the agents to stop the defendant and to search his car. Allison v. State, 274 So. 2d 678, 1973 Miss. LEXIS 1609 (Miss. 1973).

An agent of the alcoholic beverage control division did not have authority to serve a search warrant issued for the purpose of making a search for illegal gambling equipment, since such agents have no police powers other than those expressly granted by the provisions of the local option alcoholic beverage control law. Presley v. State, 229 So. 2d 830, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1259 (Miss. 1969).

Inasmuch as Code 1942, § 10265-05 excludes from the definition of “alcoholic beverage” beer and wine of not more than 4 percent of alcohol by weight, the authority conferred upon agents of the alcoholic beverage commission under Code 1942, §§ 10265-11 and 10265-17 does not authorize and empower them to check a retailer’s beer license to see whether it was in date or to inspect beer stock to determine whether it was Mississippi-taxed beer. Jolliff v. State, 215 So. 2d 234, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1338 (Miss. 1968), overruled, Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982), but see Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 261 et seq.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 111-134 (enforcement of restrictions and regulations).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 413 et seq.

§ 67-1-93. Petition for forfeiture of property other than alcoholic beverages and raw materials; service upon owner, secured or interested party; compliance with procedures.

  1. Except as otherwise provided in Section 67-1-99, when any property, other than an alcoholic beverage or raw material, is seized under this chapter or Chapter 31 of Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972, proceedings under this section shall be instituted promptly.
  2. A petition for forfeiture shall be filed promptly in the name of the State of Mississippi with the clerk of the circuit or county court of the county in which the seizure is made. A copy of such petition shall be served upon the following persons by service of process in the same manner as in civil cases:
    1. The owner of the property, if address is known;
    2. Any secured party who has registered his lien or filed a financing statement as provided by law, if the identity of such secured party can be ascertained by the agent or agency which seized the property making a good faith effort to ascertain the identity of such secured party as described in subsections (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7) of this section;
    3. Any other bona fide lienholder or secured party or other person holding an interest in the property in the nature of a security interest of whom the agent or agency has actual knowledge; and
    4. Any person in possession of property subject to forfeiture at the time that it was seized.
  3. If the property is a motor vehicle susceptible of titling under the Mississippi Motor Vehicle Title Law and if there is any reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle has been titled, the agent or agency shall make inquiry of the State Tax Commission as to what the records of the State Tax Commission show as to who is the record owner of the vehicle and who, if anyone, holds any lien or security interest which affects the vehicle.
  4. If the property is a motor vehicle and is not titled in the State of Mississippi then the agent or agency shall attempt to ascertain the name and address of the person in whose name the vehicle is licensed, and if the vehicle is licensed in a state which has in effect a certificate of title law, the agent or agency shall make inquiry of the appropriate agency of that state to determine through such agency’s records the name of the record owner of the vehicle and who, if anyone, holds any lien, security interest or other instrument in the nature of a security device which affects the vehicle.
  5. If the property is of a nature that a financing statement is required by the laws of this state to be filed to perfect a security interest affecting the property and if there is any reasonable cause to believe that a financing statement covering the security interest has been filed under the laws of this state, the agent or agency shall make inquiry of the appropriate office designated in Section 75-9-501 to determine through the records of such office the name of the record owner of the property and who, if anyone, has filed a financing statement affecting the property.
  6. If the property is an aircraft or part thereof and if there is any reasonable cause to believe that an instrument in the nature of a security device affects the property, then the agent or agency shall make inquiry of the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to determine through records of the administrator the name of the record owner of the property and who, if anyone, holds an instrument in the name of a security device which affects the property.
  7. In the case of all other property other than an alcoholic beverage or raw material subject to forfeiture, if there is any reasonable cause to believe that an instrument in the nature of a security device affects the property, then the agent or agency shall make a good faith inquiry to identify the holder of any such instrument.
  8. In the event the answer to an inquiry states that the record owner of the property is any person other than the person who was in possession of it when it was seized, or states that any person holds any lien, security interest or other interest in the nature of a security interest which affects the property, the agent or agency shall cause any record owner and also any lienholder, secured party or other person who holds an interest in the property in the nature of a security interest which affects the property to be named in the petition of forfeiture and to be served with process in the same manner as in civil cases.
  9. If the owner of the property cannot be found and served with a copy of the petition of forfeiture, or if no person was in possession of the property subject to forfeiture at the time that it was seized and the owner of the property is unknown, the agent or agency shall file with the clerk of the court in which the proceeding is pending an affidavit to such effect, whereupon the clerk of the court shall publish notice of the hearing addressed to “the Unknown Owner of_______________ ,” filling in the blank space with a reasonably detailed description of the property subject to forfeiture. Service by publication shall be made in accordance with the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure.
  10. No proceedings instituted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall proceed to hearing unless the judge conducting the hearing is satisfied that this section has been complied with. Any answer received from an inquiry required by subsections (3) through (7) of this section shall be introduced into evidence at the hearing.

HISTORY: Laws, 1984, ch. 424, § 3; Laws, 1990, ch. 451, § 1; Laws, 1991, ch. 573, § 117; Laws, 2001, ch. 495, § 26, eff from and after Jan. 1, 2002.

Cross References —

Mississippi State Tax Commission, generally, see §§27-3-1 et seq.

Motor vehicle titles and registration, generally, see §§63-21-1 et seq.

Security interests in motor vehicles, see §§63-21-41 et seq.

Notice of sale to last known registered owner of abandoned motor vehicle, see §63-23-9.

Seizure, detention, and disposal of alcoholic beverages, raw materials, and other property seized, see §67-1-17.

Administrative forfeiture of property, see §67-1-99.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Sections 67-1-17, 67-1-93, 67-1-95 and 67-1-97, which govern the seizure and disposal of personal property which is in violation of the prohibition law, do not provide for the return of the property prior to a hearing on the forfeiture proceeding. Thus, a defendant was not entitled to the return of her seized car pending the outcome of the forfeiture hearing where the defendant admitted that the intoxicating liquors being transported in her automobile belonged to her, and that she was in the vehicle and was participating in the actual transportation of the contraband. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. One (1) 1984 Black Mercury Grand Marquis, 568 So. 2d 707, 1990 Miss. LEXIS 564 (Miss. 1990).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Lawfulness of seizure of property used in violation of law as prerequisite to forfeiture action or proceeding. 8 A.L.R.3d 473.

Relief to owner of motor vehicle subject to state forfeiture for use in violation of narcotics laws. 50 A.L.R.3d 172.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 14 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 53 et seq.

§ 67-1-95. Owner’s verified answer; forfeiture hearing; burden of proof; rights of holders of security interests, liens, or other interests; disposition of property.

  1. An owner of property seized, other than an owner of alcoholic beverages or raw materials, shall file a verified answer within twenty (20) days after the completion of service of process. If no answer is filed, the court shall hear evidence that the property is subject to forfeiture and forfeit the property to the agency which seized the property. If an answer is filed, a time for hearing on forfeiture shall be set within thirty (30) days of filing the answer or at the succeeding term of court if court would not be in progress within thirty (30) days after filing the answer. Provided, however, that upon request by the agent or agency, or the owner of the property, the court may postpone the forfeiture hearing to a date past the time any criminal action is pending against such owner.
  2. If the owner of the property has filed a verified answer denying that the property is subject to forfeiture, then the burden is on the state to prove that the property is subject to forfeiture; however, if no answer had been filed by the owner of the property, the petition for forfeiture may be introduced into evidence and shall be prima facie evidence that the property is subject to forfeiture.
  3. At the hearing any claimant of any right, title or interest in the property may prove his lien, security interest or other interest in the nature of a security interest, to be bona fide and created without knowledge or consent that the property was to be used so as to cause the property to be subject to forfeiture.
  4. If it is found that the property is subject to forfeiture, then the judge shall forfeit the property to the agency which seized the property. If proof at the hearing discloses that the interest of any bona fide lienholder, secured party or other person holding an interest in the property in the nature of a security interest is greater than or equal to the present value of the property, the court shall order the property released to him. If such interest is less than the present value of the property and if the proof shows that the property is subject to forfeiture the court shall order the property forfeited to the agency.
  5. Upon a petition filed in the name of the state of Mississippi with the clerk of the circuit or county court of the county in which the seizure is made, the court having jurisdiction may order the property summarily forfeited except when lawful possession and title can be ascertained. If a person is found to have had lawful possession and title prior to seizure, the court shall order the property returned to the owner, if the owner so desires.

HISTORY: Laws, 1984, ch. 424, § 4, eff from and after passage (approved April 23, 1984).

Cross References —

Motor vehicle titles and registration, generally, see §§63-21-1 et seq.

Security interests in motor vehicles, see §§63-21-41 et seq.

Seizure, detention, and disposal of alcoholic beverages, raw materials, and other property seized, see §67-1-17.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Sections 67-1-17, 67-1-93, 67-1-95 and 67-1-97, which govern the seizure and disposal of personal property which is in violation of the prohibition law, do not provide for the return of the property prior to a hearing on the forfeiture proceeding. Thus, a defendant was not entitled to the return of her seized car pending the outcome of the forfeiture hearing where the defendant admitted that the intoxicating liquors being transported in her automobile belonged to her, and that she was in the vehicle and was participating in the actual transportation of the contraband. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. One (1) 1984 Black Mercury Grand Marquis, 568 So. 2d 707, 1990 Miss. LEXIS 564 (Miss. 1990).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Lawfulness of seizure of property used in violation of law as prerequisite to forfeiture action or proceeding. 8 A.L.R.3d 473.

Relief to owner of motor vehicle subject to state forfeiture for use in violation of narcotics laws. 50 A.L.R.3d 172.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 14 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 52 et seq.

§ 67-1-97. Public auction of forfeited property other than alcoholic beverages and raw materials; disbursement of proceeds.

  1. All property other than alcoholic beverages or raw materials that have been forfeited shall be sold at a public auction for cash by the agency which seized such property to the highest and best bidder after advertising the sale for at least once each week for three (3) consecutive weeks, the last notice to appear not more than ten (10) days nor less than five (5) days prior to such sale, in a newspaper having a general circulation throughout the state of Mississippi. Such notices shall contain a description of the property to be sold and a statement of the time and place of the sale. It shall not be necessary to the validity of such sale either to have the property present at the place of the sale or to have the name of the owner thereof stated in such notice. The proceeds of the sale shall be delivered to the court clerk and shall be disposed of as follows:
    1. To any bona fide lienholder, secured party or other party holding an interest in the property in the nature of a security interest, to the extent of his interest; and
    2. The balance, if any, after deduction of all storage and court costs, shall be forwarded to the state treasurer and deposited with and used as general funds of the state.
    1. Any county or municipal law enforcement agency which seizes property, other than alcoholic beverages or raw materials, may maintain, repair, use and operate for official purposes all such property that has been forfeited if it is free from any interest of a bona fide lienholder, secured party or other party who holds an interest in the property in the nature of a security interest. Such county or municipal law enforcement agency may purchase the interest of a bona fide lienholder, secured party or other party who holds an interest so that the property can be released for its use. If the property is a motor vehicle susceptible of titling under the Mississippi Motor Vehicle Title Law, the law enforcement agency shall be deemed to be the purchaser, and the certificate of title shall be issued to it as required by subsection (4) of this section.
    2. All other property that a county or municipal law enforcement agency seizes, other than alcoholic beverages and raw materials, and other than property which such law enforcement agency retains for use and operation for official purposes, shall, upon its forfeiture, be sold by such law enforcement agency in the same manner and subject to the same procedure for the sale of such property as provided for in subsection (1) of this section; however, the proceeds of such sale shall be delivered to the clerk of the county or municipality for disposal in the following manner:
      1. To any bona fide lienholder, secured party or other party holding an interest in the property in the nature of a security interest, to the extent of his interest; and
      2. The balance, if any, after deduction of all storage and court costs, shall be forwarded to the clerk of the county or municipality, as the case may be, and deposited with and used as general funds of the county or municipality.
  2. All other agencies which have seized all such property other than alcoholic beverages and raw materials may maintain, repair, use and operate for official purposes all property that has been forfeited to them if such property is free from any interest of a bona fide lienholder, secured party or other party who holds an interest in the property in the nature of a security interest. In such case, the agency may purchase the interest of a bona fide lienholder, secured party or other party who holds an interest so that the property can be released for use by such agency.

    Such agency may maintain, repair, use and operate the property with money appropriated for current operations. If the property is a motor vehicle susceptible of titling under the Mississippi Motor Vehicle Title Law, such agency is deemed to be the purchaser and the certificate of title shall be issued to it as required by subsection (4) of this section.

  3. The State Tax Commission shall issue a certificate of title to any person who purchases property under the provisions of this section when a certificate of title is required under the laws of this state.

HISTORY: Laws, 1984, ch. 424, § 5, eff from and after passage (approved April 23, 1984).

Cross References —

Mississippi State Tax Commission, generally, see §§27-3-1 et seq.

Role of Mississippi State Tax Commission in seizure of and disposition of property subject to forfeiture for unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages and related property, see §§67-1-17,67-1-18.

Seizure, detention, and disposal of alcoholic beverages, raw materials, and other property seized, see §67-1-17.

Role of Mississippi State Tax Commission in release, sale, or destruction of alcoholic beverages and raw materials seized under alcoholic beverage control law, see §67-1-18.

Administrative forfeiture of property, see §67-1-99.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Sections 67-1-17, 67-1-93, 67-1-95 and 67-1-97, which govern the seizure and disposal of personal property which is in violation of the prohibition law, do not provide for the return of the property prior to a hearing on the forfeiture proceeding. Thus, a defendant was not entitled to the return of her seized car pending the outcome of the forfeiture hearing where the defendant admitted that the intoxicating liquors being transported in her automobile belonged to her, and that she was in the vehicle and was participating in the actual transportation of the contraband. Mississippi State Tax Com. v. One (1) 1984 Black Mercury Grand Marquis, 568 So. 2d 707, 1990 Miss. LEXIS 564 (Miss. 1990).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Lawfulness of seizure of property used in violation of law as prerequisite to forfeiture action or proceeding. 8 A.L.R.3d 473.

Relief to owner of motor vehicle subject to state forfeiture for use in violation of narcotics laws. 50 A.L.R.3d 172.

Application of requirement that newspaper be locally published for official notice publication. 85 A.L.R.4th 581.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 14 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 53 et seq.

§ 67-1-99. Administrative forfeiture of certain property.

  1. Property subject to forfeiture, other than alcoholic beverages or raw materials, as described by Section 67-1-17 and having a value of Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) or less may be forfeited by the administrative forfeiture procedures provided for in this section.
  2. The seizing law enforcement agency shall provide notice of intention to forfeit the seized property administratively, by certified mail, return receipt required, to all persons who are required to be notified pursuant to Section 67-1-93.
  3. In the event that notice of administrative forfeiture cannot be given as provided in subsection (2) of this section because of refusal, failure to claim, insufficient address or any other reason the seizing law enforcement agency shall provide notice by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the seizure took place once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks.
  4. Notice pursuant to subsections (2) and (3) of this section shall include the following information:
    1. A description of the property;
    2. The approximate value of the property;
    3. The date and place of the seizure;
    4. The connection between the property and the violation of the Local Option ABC Laws or Chapter 31, Title 97, Mississippi Code of 1972;
    5. The instructions for filing a request for judicial review; and
    6. A statement that the property will be forfeited to the seizing law enforcement agency if a request for judicial review is not timely filed.
  5. Persons claiming an interest in the seized property may initiate judicial review of the seizure and proposed forfeiture by filing a written request for judicial review with the chief law enforcement officer of the seizing law enforcement agency within thirty (30) days after receipt of the certified letter or within thirty (30) days after the first publication of notice, whichever is applicable.
  6. If no request for judicial review is timely filed, the seizing law enforcement agency shall prepare a written declaration of forfeiture of the subject property and the forfeited property shall be used, disposed of, or distributed in accordance with the provision of Section 67-1-97.
  7. Upon receipt of a timely request for judicial review, the attorney for the seizing law enforcement agency shall promptly file a petition for forfeiture and proceed as provided in Section 67-1-93.

HISTORY: Laws, 1990, ch. 451, § 2; Laws, 1991, ch. 372, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved March 15, 1991).

§ 67-1-101. Governing authorities of certain municipalities authorized to establish and/or modify leisure and recreation districts.

  1. For the purposes of this section, the following words shall have the following meanings ascribed in this section, unless the context clearly otherwise requires:
    1. “Municipality” means any incorporated city, town or village that has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law or is in a county that has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law
    2. “Leisure and recreation district” means an area officially designated by ordinance or resolution of the governing authorities of a municipality or county as a leisure and recreation district.
    3. “County” means any county that has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law.
    1. Subject to the provisions of this section, the governing authorities of a municipality, by ordinance, may establish one or more leisure and recreation districts within the corporate boundaries of the municipality and designate the geographic area or areas to be included within a district. The governing authorities of a municipality, by ordinance, may modify the boundaries of a leisure and recreation district. In addition, the boundaries of a leisure and recreation district may extend from within the municipality into the unincorporated area of the county in which the municipality is located if the county consents to the extension and has voted in favor of coming out from under the dry law.
    2. Subject to the provisions of this section, the board of Supervisors of a county, by resolution, may establish one or more leisure and recreation districts within the county that are outside the corporate limits of any municipality in the county and designate the geographic area or areas to be included within the districts.
    3. The designation or modification of the geographic area or areas as a leisure and recreation district shall include a detailed description of the area or areas within the district, boundaries of the district and a georeferenced map of the district. In addition to any other matters addressed in an ordinance or resolution establishing or modifying a leisure and recreation district, a municipality or county, as the case may be, must describe the manner in which the municipality or county, as the case may be, will provide for adequate law enforcement and other public safety measures and services within the district. Following the establishment and/or modification of a leisure and recreation district, the municipality or county, as the case may be, shall provide the Department of Revenue with (i) a copy of any ordinance or resolution relating to the establishment or modification of the district, (ii) verification from the municipal police department and/or applicable sheriff’s department indicating how such department will provide adequate law enforcement and other public safety measures and services within the district, and (iii) a list of persons or other entities that hold permits issued under Section 67-1-51(c), (e), (f), (g), (l), (n) or (o) and are located and/or doing business under such permits in the district at the time the district is established.

HISTORY: Laws, 2016, ch. 471, § 1; Laws, 2017, ch. 431, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2017; Laws, 2018, ch. 328, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2018.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2016, ch. 471, § 3 provides:

“SECTION 3. Section 1 of this act shall be codified as a new section in Chapter 1, Title 67, Mississippi Code of 1972.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2017 amendment added (1)(a)(xiv) through (xxii) and made related stylistic changes; inserted “or county” near the end of (1)(b); substituted “one or more leisure” for “a leisure” in (2)(a)(ii); divided former (2)(a)(ii) into present (2)(a)(ii) and (ii)1, substituted “this item 1, and/or” for “this subparagraph (iii)” at the end of 1, and added 2; added (b)(i) and (ii), (c) and (d); redesignated former (b) as (e), and therein inserted “or county, as the case may be” twice in the second sentence and once in the third sentence, and inserted “or resolution” in the third sentence; and made minor stylistic changes.

The 2018 amendment, in (1)(a), deleted (i), which read: “Located in one (1) of the three (3) most southern counties in the State of Mississippi,” and deleted (ii) through (xxii), which listed the cities of Hattiesburg, Tupelo, Holly Springs, Greenville, Greenwood, Canton, Grenada, Starkville, Water Valley, Jackson, Senatobia, Corinth, Natchez, Laurel, Clinton, Cleveland, Vicksburg, Ridgeland, Brandon, Flowood, and Clarksdale, and added “that has voted in favor...under the dry law” at the end of the introductory paragraph; added (1)(c); deleted former (2)(a)(ii) and (iii), which provided descriptions of leisure and recreation districts established by the cities of Jackson and Senatobia, as defined in former paragraphs (1)(a)(xi) and (1)(a)(xii), respectively; deleted former (2)(b), which applied to Madison County; redesignated former (2)(c) as (2)(b), and therein substituted “a county” for “Lee County, Mississippi”; deleted former (2)(d), which applied to Rankin County; and redesignated former (2)(e) as (2)(c).

Chapter 3. Sale of Light Wine, Beer, and Other Alcoholic Beverages

§ 67-3-1. Declaration of purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to legalize the sale within this state of light wines and beer, to legalize the manufacture of beer, and to regulate the business of manufacturing and of selling light wines and beer so as to prevent the illicit manufacture, sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages as defined in Section 67-1-5, the manufacture and sale of which it is not the purpose of this chapter to legalize.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10211; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 3; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 3; Laws, 2012, ch. 501, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2012.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 1 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 30, 2012), amended this section. Section 3 of Chapter 323, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 1 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, which contains language that specifically provides that it supersedes §67-3-1 as amended by Laws of 2012, ch. 323.

Amendment Notes —

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323), deleted “of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” following “state of light wines and beer,” substituted “selling light wines and beer” for “selling such liquors” and substituted “consumption of alcoholic beverages as defined in Section 67-1-5” for “consumption of liquors having an alcoholic content of more than five percent (5%) by weight.”

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 501), deleted “manufacture and” following “legalize the,” deleted “of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” following “state of light wines and beer,” inserted “to legalize the manufacture of beer,” substituted “selling light wines and beer” for “selling such liquors” and substituted “consumption of alcoholic beverages as defined in Section 67-1-5” for “consumption of liquors having an alcoholic content of more than five percent (5%) by weight.”

Cross References —

Labeling requirements for light wines and beer, see §27-71-509.

Local option alcohol beverage control law, see §§67-1-1 et seq.

Regulation of relations between wholesalers and suppliers of light beer and wine, see §§67-7-1 et seq.

Intoxicating beverage offenses generally, see §§97-31-5 et seq.

Prosecutions for intoxicating beverage offenses generally, see §§99-27-1 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

The matter of issuing permits and the investigation of the validity of information presented in permit applications for the manufacture, sale, distribution, possession, and transportation of light wines and beer is strictly within the province of the State Tax Commission and a municipality has no power to act to block, prevent, restrict, refuse, or revoke alcoholic beverage permits; however, there is certainly nothing to prohibit interested parties from forwarding information they may consider relevant to the issuance or suspension or revocation of a permit to the attention of the State Tax Commission, the district attorney, or the county prosecuting attorney, as the situation demands. Thomas, April 10, 1998, A.G. Op. #98-0142.

A city cannot enact regulations to require that the applicant for a beer and/or light wine permit is the actual owner of the business, that the owner or the owner’s employees do not have a criminal records, or to require that the applicant and employees be fingerprinted and photographed. Thomas, April 10, 1998, A.G. Op. #98-0142.

A municipality may not adopt an ordinance which would further regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors by requiring commercial establishments holding a valid permit issued by the State Tax Commission to sell such beverages to achieve a mandatory ratio of food sales to alcoholic beverage sales. Rutledge, June 5, 1998, A.G. Op. #98-0278.

A city has no authority to require a retailer who has been issued a permit for the sale of beer and light wine by the State Tax Commission to also make application and pay for a second, “city” permit, separate and in addition to a local privilege license, as a condition of engaging in the sale of such beverages within the city; the only permits required by state law are not granted by municipalities but by the State Tax Commission. Lee, October 23, 1998, A.G. Op. #98-0661.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Criminal liability of member or agent of private club or association, or of owner or lessor of its premises, for violation of state or local liquor or gambling laws thereon. 98 A.L.R.3d 694.

§ 67-3-3. Definitions.

When used in this chapter, unless the context indicates otherwise:

“Commissioner” means the Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue of the State of Mississippi, and his authorized agents and employees.

“Person” means one or more persons, a company, a corporation, a partnership, a syndicate or an association.

“Brewpub” shall have the meaning ascribed to such term in Section 27-71-301.

“Beer” means a malt beverage as defined in the Federal Alcohol Administration Act and any rules and regulations adopted pursuant to such act of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight.

“Light wine” means wine of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight.

“Small craft brewery” means a person having a permit under this chapter to manufacture or brew light wine or beer in this state and who manufactures or brews not more than sixty thousand (60,000) barrels of light wine or beer at all breweries that such person or its affiliates, subsidiary or parent company owns or controls or with whom such person contracts with for the manufacture of light wine or beer. For purposes of this paragraph, contract-brewed beer manufactured by a person having a permit under this chapter to manufacture or brew light wine or beer shall be included in the sixty-thousand-barrel limitation.

“Growler” means a sealed container that holds not more than one hundred twenty-eight (128) ounces of light wine or beer. A growler must have a label on it stating what it contains.

“Manufacturer” shall have the meaning ascribed to such term in Section 27-71-301.

“Contract-brewed beer” means beer brewed by a manufacturer who:

Makes the beer pursuant to a written contract with another beer manufacturer, and neither entity has a controlling interest in the other entity;

Makes the beer in accordance with a recipe that is a trade secret of the beer manufacturer having its beer made under contract; and

Has no right to sell the beer to any other beer manufacturer, importer or wholesaler other than the beer manufacturer who contracted for the beer.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10210; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 8; Laws, 2003, ch. 322, § 1; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 136; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 1; Laws, 2017, ch. 345, § 4, eff from and after July 1, 2017.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2003 amendment added “unless the context indicates otherwise” to the introductory language; deleted “The word” from the beginning of (a) through (c); and added (d).

The 2009 amendment, effective from and after July 1, 2010, substituted “Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue” for “Chairman of the State Tax Commission” in (a).

The 2012 amendment added “of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight; and” to the end of (d); added (e); and made minor stylistic changes.

The 2017 amendment rewrote (c), which read: “‘Manufacturer’ and ‘retailer’ include brewpubs licensed pursuant to Article 3, Chapter 71, Title 27, Mississippi Code of 1972, unless otherwise clearly provided”; added (f) through (i); and made minor stylistic changes.

Cross References —

Commissioner of revenue of the department of revenue, see §§27-3-3,27-3-4.

Federal Aspects—

Federal Alcohol Administration Act, see 27 USCS §§ 201 et seq.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 3 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 1 et seq.

§ 67-3-5. Light wines and beer legalized.

  1. It shall be lawful, subject to the provisions set forth in this chapter, in this state to transport, store, sell, distribute, possess, receive and/or manufacture wine and beer, and it is hereby declared that it is the legislative intent that this chapter privileges the lawful sale and manufacture, within this state, of such light wines and beer. In determining if a wine product is “light wine,” or contains an alcoholic content of more than five percent (5%) by weight, or is not an “alcoholic beverage” as defined in the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Chapter 1 of Title 67, Mississippi Code of 1972, the alcoholic content of such wine product shall be subject to the same permitted tolerance as is allowed by the labeling requirements for light wine provided for in Section 27-71-509.
  2. Subject to the provisions set forth in this chapter, it shall be lawful in this state to transport, store, sell, distribute, possess, receive, and/or manufacture beer of an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight, if the beer is manufactured to be sold legally in another state and is transported outside of this state for retail sale.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10207, 10228; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1987, ch. 355, § 2; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 4; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 4; Laws, 2012, ch. 501, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2012.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 2 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 30, 2012), amended this section. Section 4 of Chapter 323, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 2 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, which contains language that specifically provides that it supersedes §67-3-5 as amended by Laws of 2012, ch.323.

Amendment Notes —

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323), deleted “of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” following “manufacture wine and beer” in the first sentence.

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 501), added (2) deleted “of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” following “manufacture wine and beer” in the first sentence; and

Cross References —

Information concerning alcohol content of light wines and beer, to be displayed on labels or containers of those commodities, see §27-71-509.

Local option alcohol beverage control law, see §§67-1-1 et seq.

Definition of “alcoholic beverage,” see §67-1-5.

Application of definition of light wine and beer to Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act, see §67-7-5.

Rule making it unlawful to manufacture intoxicating liquors, see §§97-31-21 et seq.

Rule making it unlawful to possess or sell intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-27.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

2. Construction.

3. Indictment.

4. Evidence.

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

The legislature had the power to enact statute authorizing sale of beer within the state and also authorizing county by election to prohibit the sale of beer within that county. Hays v. State, 219 Miss. 808, 69 So. 2d 845, 1954 Miss. LEXIS 389 (Miss. 1954).

Enactment of statute legalizing sale and possession of beer pending appeal from conviction for possessing beer and intoxicating liquor, held without effect upon conviction. Brown v. State, 170 Miss. 86, 153 So. 302, 1934 Miss. LEXIS 89 (Miss. 1934).

2. Construction.

Section 67-3-13 did not deny a defendant, who was convicted of possession of beer in a “dry” part of the county while traveling home after having legally purchased the beer in a “wet” city, equal protection under the laws and constitution of the State of Mississippi and the Constitution of the United States, nor was there any invasion of the defendant’s constitutional right of privacy. Dantzler v. State, 542 So. 2d 906, 1989 Miss. LEXIS 197 (Miss. 1989).

Chapter relating to wine and beer repealed statute making it unlawful to sell beer. Hays v. State, 219 Miss. 808, 69 So. 2d 845, 1954 Miss. LEXIS 389 (Miss. 1954).

Court must consider statute legalizing sale of wine and beer as an entirety and effect must be given to each part of statute, so as to fulfill intent of legislature. Alexander v. Graves, 178 Miss. 583, 173 So. 417, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 221 (Miss. 1937).

3. Indictment.

Where an indictment charged only that the accused did unlawfully sell intoxicating liquor, namely home brew, and there was no allegation that the sale of beer has been outlawed by an election in the county, the indictment was insufficient because no crime was stated. Riley v. State, 212 Miss. 746, 55 So. 2d 447, 1951 Miss. LEXIS 505 (Miss. 1951).

4. Evidence.

Evidence that defendant’s place of business had a reputation of being place where intoxicating liquors were sold was properly excluded in a prosecution for unlawful possession of beer. State v. Sisk, 209 Miss. 174, 46 So. 2d 191, 1950 Miss. LEXIS 377 (Miss. 1950).

In prosecution for unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor the affidavit must allege and the proof must show an alcoholic content in excess of 4 per cent by weight. Hall v. State, 199 Miss. 560, 24 So. 2d 780, 1946 Miss. LEXIS 224 (Miss. 1946).

Mere fact that the malt liquor or beer may be intoxicating does not of necessity show that the alcoholic content exceeded 4 per cent by weight. Hall v. State, 199 Miss. 560, 24 So. 2d 780, 1946 Miss. LEXIS 224 (Miss. 1946).

Refusal of requested instruction in prosecution for unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor submitting to jury the factual issue whether the malt liquor or beer contained over the maximum alcoholic content of 4 per cent by weight, constituted reversible error, where the testimony, although showing that the liquor or beer was intoxicating, did not disclose what percentage of alcohol by weight it contained. Hall v. State, 199 Miss. 560, 24 So. 2d 780, 1946 Miss. LEXIS 224 (Miss. 1946).

Evidence that accused believed wine in his possession did not contain over four per cent of alcohol, was inadmissible. Lowe v. Jackson, 181 Miss. 296, 179 So. 568, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 71 (Miss. 1938).

The intent of possessor of wine having an alcoholic content of more than 4% is immaterial. Lowe v. Jackson, 181 Miss. 296, 179 So. 568, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 71 (Miss. 1938).

§ 67-3-7. Local option elections in county.

  1. If any county, at an election held for the purpose under the election laws of the state, shall by a majority vote of the duly qualified electors voting in the election determine that the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of wine and beer shall not be permitted in such county, then the same shall not be permitted therein except as authorized under Section 67-9-1 and as may be otherwise authorized in this section. An election to determine whether such transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of such beverages shall be excluded from any county in the state, shall, on a petition of twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified electors of such county, be ordered by the board of supervisors of the county, for such county only. No election on the question shall be held in any one (1) county more often than once in five (5) years.

    In counties which have elected, or may elect by a majority vote of the duly qualified electors voting in the election, that the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of wine or beer shall not be permitted in the county, an election may be held in the same manner as the election hereinabove provided on the question of whether or not the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of said beverages shall be permitted in such county. Such election shall be ordered by the board of supervisors of such county on a petition of twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified electors of such county. No election on this question can be ordered more often than once in five (5) years.

  2. Nothing in this section shall make it unlawful to possess beer or wine, as defined herein, in any municipality which has heretofore or which may hereafter vote in an election, pursuant to Section 67-3-9, in which a majority of the qualified electors vote in favor of permitting the sale and the receipt, storage and transportation for the purpose of sale of beer or wine as defined herein.
  3. Nothing in this section shall make it unlawful to:
    1. Possess or consume light wine or beer at a qualified resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5;
    2. Sell, distribute and transport light wine or beer to a qualified resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5;
    3. Sell light wine or beer at a qualified resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5 if such light wine or beer is sold by a person with a permit to engage in the business as a retailer of light wine or beer;
    4. Transport beer of an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight if it is being transported to another state for legal sale in that state;
    5. Transport legally purchased light wine or beer in unopened containers if it is being transported on a state or federal highway; however, this paragraph shall not apply to a retailer unless the retailer has purchased the light wine or beer from a wholesaler or distributor for the designated sales territory in which the retailer is located and the retailer has in his possession an invoice from the wholesaler or distributor for the light wine or beer; or
    6. Transport homemade beer as authorized in Section 67-3-11.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10208; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1942, ch. 224; Laws, 1956, ch. 252; Laws, 1958, ch. 279; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 9; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 5; Laws, 2004, ch. 397, § 5; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 5; Laws, 2012, ch. 501, § 3; Laws, 2013, ch. 345, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2013; Laws, 2018, ch. 385, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2018.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 3 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 30), amended this section. Section 5 of Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 3 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, which contains language that specifically provides that it supersedes §67-3-7 as amended by Laws of 2012, ch. 323.

Amendment Notes —

The 2004 amendment added “and as may be otherwise authorized in this section” at the end of the first sentence in (1); and added (3), which authorizes the sale of light wine or beer at qualified resort areas in counties in which the sale of light wine or beer is otherwise prohibited.

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323), in (1), deleted “of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” following “wine and beer” in the first sentence of the first paragraph, and following ‘wine and beer‘ in the first sentence of the second paragraph, substituted “of the county” for “thereof” near the end of the second sentence of the first paragraph, and made minor stylistic changes.

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 501), in (1), deleted “of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” following “wine and beer” in the first sentence of the first paragraph, and following “wine and beer” in the first sentence of the second paragraph, substituted “of the county” for “thereof” near the end of the second sentence of the first paragraph, and made minor stylistic changes; and added (3)(d).

The 2013 amendment added (3)(e); and made a minor stylistic change.

The 2018 amendment, in (3), added (e), and redesignated former (e) as (f).

Cross References —

Petition of qualified electors for county election, see §19-3-55.

Elections under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §§67-1-11 to67-1-15.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

2. Signatures to petition.

3. Findings of jurisdictional facts.

4. —Conclusiveness.

5. Notice of election.

6. Matters submitted.

7. Ballots.

8. Qualifications of electors.

9. Judicial review.

10. Frequency of elections.

11. Miscellaneous.

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

Chapter 279, Laws of 1958, is constitutional and valid, and states an enforceable and definite offense. Kelly v. State, 237 Miss. 112, 113 So. 2d 540, 1959 Miss. LEXIS 453 (Miss. 1959).

Omission of the phrase “as amended” in referring to the statute in petitions to the board of supervisors, upon which a local option election was held under Chapter 252, Laws of 1956, asking that the board call an election to submit to the electors the proposition of whether or not wines and beer should continue to be sold, transported, stored, distributed, received or manufactured in the named county, as provided by Code 1942, § 10208, did not constitute such substantial defect or error in the jurisdiction of the board as to warrant reversal and nullification of the election, where the voters were not misled at the election, and the correct proposition had been submitted to them. Stennis v. Board of Supervisors, 232 Miss. 212, 98 So. 2d 636, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 462 (Miss. 1957).

Although county in which city was located had voted out beer under this section in 1939, this would not prevent city from holding an election under Code 1942, § 10208.5, to determine whether or not beer could be sold therein; chapter 252, Laws of 1956, neither expressly nor by implication repealed Code 1942, § 10208.5. Lee County Drys v. Anderson, 231 Miss. 222, 95 So. 2d 224, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 508 (Miss. 1957).

The legislature had the power to enact statute authorizing sale of beer within the state and also authorizing county by election to prohibit the sale of beer within that county. Hays v. State, 219 Miss. 808, 69 So. 2d 845, 1954 Miss. LEXIS 389 (Miss. 1954).

Where the ordinance of a board of supervisors prohibited the sale and consumption of wines and beer in all territory of the county within five miles of any church, school, storehouse, filling station or any other public place, the ordinance was unreasonable because it usurped the function of electorate to decide the question of determining whether the entire county should be wet or dry. State v. Hoyle, 211 Miss. 342, 51 So. 2d 730, 1951 Miss. LEXIS 362 (Miss. 1951).

Early decision of Martin v. Board of Supervisors (1938) 181 Miss 363, 178 So 315, on subject of outlawing beer and wine by local option election, which has stood as law of state for more than eleven years and has been relied upon by boards of supervisors in many counties and which cannot be said to be manifestly wrong or mischievous in operation, will be adhered to as established law of state, although question of whether it is necessary jurisdictional fact to be adjudicated by board of supervisors that no election on beer and wine has been held within past five years was not raised or passed upon by court in that case. Caruthers v. Panola County, 205 Miss. 403, 38 So. 2d 902, 1949 Miss. LEXIS 438 (Miss. 1949).

A municipality has no power to enact an ordinance prohibiting possession of wines and beers as herein permitted for personal consumption. City of Amory v. Yielding, 203 Miss. 265, 34 So. 2d 726, 1948 Miss. LEXIS 261 (Miss. 1948).

Primary election laws are not applicable to the general election required to be held on petition for an election on the question of prohibiting the transportation, sale, etc., of light wines and beer within a county. Miles v. Board of Sup'rs, 33 So. 2d 810 (Miss. 1948).

Board of supervisors, after an election wherein it was determined that traffic in light wines and beer should be excluded from the county, must allow protestants a hearing on issue whether the petition for the election contained the required 20 per cent of the qualified electors. Costas v. Board of Sup'rs, 198 Miss. 440, 22 So. 2d 229, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 213 (Miss. 1945).

Fact that county is divided into two judicial districts does not require that 20 per cent of the qualified voters in each judicial district petition for election hereunder, but the requirement for the holding of such election is satisfied if 20 per cent of the qualified voters of the whole county, disregarding the districts, petition for the election. Sparks v. Reddoch, 196 Miss. 609, 18 So. 2d 450, 1944 Miss. LEXIS 241 (Miss. 1944).

The statute authorizing counties to prohibit sale of beer and wine by local election is not unconstitutional as unlawful delegation of legislative power; and the calling of a local election to prohibit sale of beer and wine within county was not unconstitutional as taking previous licensees’ property without due process. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

Statute providing for election on question whether beer and light wines should continue to be sold in county does not require that such election should be held on general election date, but contemplates special election of which electors of county must be given notice. Simpson County v. Burkett, 178 Miss. 44, 172 So. 329, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 184 (Miss. 1937).

2. Signatures to petition.

The statute authorizing local option election on petition of twenty per cent of qualified voters does not prohibit voter from authorizing some other person to sign petition for him rather than signing personally. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

3. Findings of jurisdictional facts.

Hearing before county board of supervisors to determine whether petition to exclude beer and wine from county contains requisite signatures is a judicial proceeding, and members of board of supervisors, convened as court to hear written protest denying fact that twenty percent of qualified electors of county signed petition for election, were correct in their refusal to permit themselves to be cross-examined as witnesses on issues before them, and such refusal is not denial of full and complete hearing of protests where protestants were given right to introduce other evidence, which they declined to do. Duggan v. Board of Sup'rs, 207 Miss. 854, 43 So. 2d 566, 1949 Miss. LEXIS 396 (Miss. 1949).

It is not essential to jurisdiction of board of supervisors to order election under this section that it affirmatively adjudicate fact to be that no such election has been held within past five years and absence of such adjudication in proceedings does not make same void. Caruthers v. Panola County, 205 Miss. 403, 38 So. 2d 902, 1949 Miss. LEXIS 438 (Miss. 1949).

It is not necessary that the board of supervisors find and recite as a jurisdictional fact that no election has been had within five years prior to the making of its order. Henry v. Board of Sup'rs, 203 Miss. 780, 34 So. 2d 232, 1948 Miss. LEXIS 321 (Miss. 1948).

The hearing before the board of supervisors to determine whether a petition filed under this statute contains the names of a sufficient number of qualified electors is a judicial proceeding from which interested parties and their attorneys may not be excluded and from whom relevant facts may not be withheld. Miles v. Board of Sup'rs, 33 So. 2d 810 (Miss. 1948).

The board of supervisors must adjudicate the facts requisite to an order calling an election to legalize the sale of light wine and beer before the order is entered; and, while it is better practice for the board of supervisors in its order expressly to find and adjudicate the total number of qualified electors in the county and on the petition, it is sufficient if the order recites that the petition is that of not less than twenty percentum of the qualified voters of the county; and failure of the board before entering the order to determine the number of qualified voters in the county and the percentage on the petition as of the time that the matter was considered was not cured by the appointment of a man at that time to ascertain such facts and his reporting back after the election had been held. Miles v. Board of Sup'rs, 200 Miss. 214, 26 So. 2d 541, 1946 Miss. LEXIS 285 (Miss. 1946).

Finding of trial court that order of board of supervisors ordering referendum election upon issue whether traffic in beer and light wines should be excluded from county was properly and timely signed by the president of the board, was not manifestly wrong or without sufficient basis so as to require reversal. Miller v. Board of Sup'rs, 198 Miss. 320, 22 So. 2d 372, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 200 (Miss. 1945).

Adjudication of board of supervisors as to sufficiency of signatures to petition for an election to determine whether traffic in light wines and beers should be excluded from the county, was interlocutory, and entire cause, including that issue, must on pertinent and competent protest be adjudicated by the board upon trial before the final judgment could be entered in the case. Costas v. Board of Sup'rs, 198 Miss. 440, 22 So. 2d 229, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 213 (Miss. 1945).

Where the order of the board of supervisors found as a fact that a certain number of qualified electors had duly signed the petition for the holding of an election hereunder, being more than 20 per cent of the qualified electors of the county, there was no merit to the contention that such order was insufficient to adjudge that fact in that reference was made therein to a certificate of the circuit court of the circuit clerk as to the number of qualified electors in the county, instead of the board making the finding as a result of its own investigation; and upon attack upon the validity of the election on certiorari, the circuit court did not err in refusing to hear evidence outside the record to support appellants’ contention that the board of supervisors failed to adjudicate the required fact that the petition for election was signed by the requisite percentage of qualified electors. Sides v. Board of Sup'rs, 190 Miss. 420, 200 So. 595, 1941 Miss. LEXIS 64 (Miss. 1941).

Where the order of the board of supervisors of a county, in passing upon the sufficiency of a petition for local option in the county signed by 810 qualified voters thereof in regard to the requisite jurisdictional facts, recited that the total registration for the county at the time the petition was presented did not exceed 2,600 voters, and therefore more than 20 per cent of the duly qualified voters of the county signed such petition, and a special election was ordered in which a majority voted for local option, and thereafter an order prohibiting the sale of beer and light wine was entered, which recited that due, legal and proper notice was given of such election as required by Mississippi Code 1930, §§ 310 and 6,265, and it was found that legal and proper notice was in fact given and a proof of publication was made and filed, such election was legal. Day v. Board of Sup'rs, 184 Miss. 611, 185 So. 251, 1939 Miss. LEXIS 16 (Miss. 1939).

Jurisdictional facts supporting a judgment calling local option election must appear in the record, but language in which they are recited need not be such as a skillful lawyer would use. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

County board of supervisors is without power to call election on question of discontinuing sale of beer and light wines in county in response to petition therefor until adjudication that petition contains sufficient number of signatures of qualified electors has been made and has been actually entered on minutes of board. Simpson County v. Burkett, 178 Miss. 44, 172 So. 329, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 184 (Miss. 1937).

4. —Conclusiveness.

An order by the board of supervisors adjudicating the sufficiency of the petition and ordering an election, and a final judgment of the board excluding wine and beer from a county, pursuant to such election, is without authority of law and a denial of due process where the hearing on the petition is a star-chamber proceeding. Miles v. Board of Sup'rs, 33 So. 2d 810 (Miss. 1948).

Fact that some citizens not in privity with present protestants had appeared before board of supervisors and contested sufficiency of petition for an election to determine whether traffic in light wines and beer should be excluded from county, on ground that petition did not contain the required 20 per cent of the qualified electors when the board adjudicated the petition to be sufficient, did not estop other taxpayers from subsequently contesting the petition on the same grounds, where the present protestants had no notice of the hearing on the original petition and did not participate therein, since the hearing on the original petition did not close the question as to the sufficiency of the petition. Costas v. Board of Sup'rs, 198 Miss. 440, 22 So. 2d 229, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 213 (Miss. 1945).

Where the order of the board of supervisors recited the jurisdictional facts, and showed compliance with the requirements of law leading to the issuance of an order prohibiting the sale of light wine and beer, their judgment became conclusive and could not be attacked by new proof on certiorari in the circuit court, since that court is confined to the examination of the proceedings appearing of record in the bill of exceptions, and cannot look to matters extraneous and foreign to the bill of exceptions; and accordingly evidence presented on certiorari that no proof of publication with respect to notice of the local option election was on file at the time the board of supervisors adjudicated the validity of the election, and the proceedings leading thereto, to prohibit the sale of light wines and beer in the county, could not affect the board’s adjudication of validity. Hall v. Franklin County, 184 Miss. 77, 185 So. 591, 1939 Miss. LEXIS 37 (Miss. 1939).

Where board of supervisors finds a jurisdictional fact, in support of judgment calling local option election, judgment is entitled to the same force and effect with respect to such fact as judgment of a court of general jurisdiction. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

A fact finding of board of supervisors, in order calling local option election, that petition for election was signed by twenty per cent or more of qualified voters, was conclusive on appeal with respect to whether petition was signed by voters personally. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

Where correctness of petition for local option election was not challenged at meeting of board of supervisors, and no appeal or certiorari was taken from board’s order for election based on petition, board’s fact finding in such order, that signatures on petition represented twenty per cent or more of the qualified electors as required by statute, was conclusive on appeal. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

5. Notice of election.

In the absence of a notice provision in §67-3-7 with respect to local option elections, the general statute requiring 30 days’ notice of election was applicable. Howard v. Crider, 341 So. 2d 477, 1977 Miss. LEXIS 2271 (Miss. 1977).

When the law requires that 30 days notice of election be given by newspaper publication, the first publication of the notice must be made at least 30 days prior to the election and the publication must be continued in each successive weekly issue of the newspaper until the date of the election, and not more than 7 days should be allowed to intervene between the last publication of the notice and the election. Neal v. Board of Supervisors, 217 Miss. 102, 63 So. 2d 540, 1953 Miss. LEXIS 414 (Miss. 1953).

Notice of local option election under this section on question of outlawing wine and beer, given for thirty days in newspaper published and circulated in county, is correct and proper notice of election, as notice required to be given of such election is governed by Code 1942, § 3018, and not by Code 1942, § 3294. Duggan v. Board of Sup'rs, 207 Miss. 854, 43 So. 2d 566, 1949 Miss. LEXIS 396 (Miss. 1949).

A published notice of election on local option was sufficient where it recited the fact and date of the order of the board of supervisors, the fact and date that an election would be held pursuant to the specified statutory enactments, and the purpose of the election. Henry v. Board of Sup'rs, 203 Miss. 780, 34 So. 2d 232, 1948 Miss. LEXIS 321 (Miss. 1948).

The contemplated method of giving notice of election on local option is by publication in a newspaper. Henry v. Board of Sup'rs, 203 Miss. 780, 34 So. 2d 232, 1948 Miss. LEXIS 321 (Miss. 1948).

This section makes no provision for notice to anybody interested except notice to the electors by the board of election commissioners concerning the holding of the election and such notice thereafter brings into the situation everybody affected thereby, and those failing thereafter before final judgment to seek to contest any phase of the issues, would be estopped. Costas v. Board of Sup'rs, 198 Miss. 440, 22 So. 2d 229, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 213 (Miss. 1945).

Objection that notice for election hereunder, for the exercise of local option in the county, was signed by the president and clerk of the board of supervisors instead of by the election commissioners of the county, was without merit where the notice given was sufficient in form and substance, and pursuant thereto the election commissioners proceeded to hold the election and certify the result thereof as required by law. Sides v. Board of Sup'rs, 190 Miss. 420, 200 So. 595, 1941 Miss. LEXIS 64 (Miss. 1941).

Six weeks’ publication of notice of local option election, effected by order of clerk of board of supervisors rather than of election commissioners, without board’s issuing commission to election commissioners directing the commissioners to hold election, was proper irrespective of applicability of general statute authorizing board of supervisors to call election, where election commissioners actually held the election in conformity with law. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

The manner of publication of notice for local option election is controlled by general statute requiring thirty days’ notice of election on any matter affecting the entire county. Martin v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 363, 178 So. 315, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 80 (Miss. 1938).

Thirty days’ notice is essential to the holding of a valid election on the question whether beer and light wines should continue to be sold in county. Simpson County v. Burkett, 178 Miss. 44, 172 So. 329, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 184 (Miss. 1937).

6. Matters submitted.

A proposition submitted on the ballot in a local option election held under Chapter 252, Laws of 1956, in the exact terms of subsection (a) thereof, to the effect that the proposition was to exclude from a named county the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, the receipt and/or manufacture of wine and beer of alcoholic content of not more than four percent by weight, but which did not state that, by virtue of subsection (b) thereof, the possession of such beverages would also be prohibited, submitted the correct proposition to the voters. Stennis v. Board of Supervisors, 232 Miss. 212, 98 So. 2d 636, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 462 (Miss. 1957).

The fact that the order of the board of supervisors and the ballots used in the election to determine whether transportation, storage, sale, etc., of wine and beer should be excluded from the county, submitted to the voters the right also to exclude the possession of wine and beer in the county did not vitiate the election. Sparks v. Reddoch, 196 Miss. 609, 18 So. 2d 450, 1944 Miss. LEXIS 241 (Miss. 1944).

Fact that order of board and ballots used in election submitted to voters the right also to exclude possession of wine and beer did not vitiate the election. Moffett v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 419, 179 So. 352, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 84 (Miss. 1938).

7. Ballots.

Language in submission at election of question whether traffic in light wines or beer “shall be excluded” from the county is not inconsistent with the statutory language so as to invalidate the election. Costas v. Board of Sup'rs, 196 Miss. 104, 15 So. 2d 365, 1943 Miss. LEXIS 6 (Miss. 1943).

The use of the device “and/or” in ballots used in election to determine exclusion of light wines and beer in the county did not render the election void as creating an ambiguity as to the issue submitted to the voters. Costas v. Board of Sup'rs, 196 Miss. 104, 15 So. 2d 365, 1943 Miss. LEXIS 6 (Miss. 1943).

The fact that some of the ballots used in several of the precincts in an election for the exercise of local option in the county, contained an incorrect description of the precincts, which error was corrected by the election manager, did not make the election invalid. Sides v. Board of Sup'rs, 190 Miss. 420, 200 So. 595, 1941 Miss. LEXIS 64 (Miss. 1941).

On certiorari to invalidate an election to exclude wine and beer on the ground that some of the ballots used in some of the voting precincts were labeled with the designation of some other precinct, which error had been corrected by the election managers, the election was valid, since if the supreme court did not look to the evidence upon which a board of supervisors made its adjudication as to validity of the election, the result would be the same for the reason that without this report of the election commissioners and the approval thereof by the board of supervisors, there would not be anything to disclose the fact that the ballots were not properly labeled when sent to the respective precincts for use. Sides v. Board of Sup'rs, 190 Miss. 420, 200 So. 595, 1941 Miss. LEXIS 64 (Miss. 1941).

8. Qualifications of electors.

In determining the sufficiency of a petition to exclude wine and beer from a county as regards the necessary number of signatures of qualified voters, the registration books are not conclusive evidence that the persons registered are qualified electors. Miles v. Board of Sup'rs, 33 So. 2d 810 (Miss. 1948).

The number of qualified voters in the county and the percentage on the petition must be determined as of the time that the matter is considered by the board, not as of the time that the petition is filed. Miles v. Board of Sup'rs, 200 Miss. 214, 26 So. 2d 541, 1946 Miss. LEXIS 285 (Miss. 1946).

Qualifications of electors were properly determined as of hour petition considered and order passed, although not entered on minutes until two days later. Moffett v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 419, 179 So. 352, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 84 (Miss. 1938).

9. Judicial review.

Order of board of supervisors excluding traffic in light wines and beer pursuant to election had is a final order from which an appeal lies. Moreover, final order of board of supervisors from which appeal will lie in the exclusion of light wines and beer in the county is the order showing affirmatively an adjudication as to the sufficiency of the notice of the election and publication according to law, that the notice contained a statement of the proposition to be voted on at the election and that the report of the election commissioners disclosed that a majority of those voting in the election had voted in favor of exclusion; and order of board of supervisors, adjudicating sufficiency of petitions for election and providing for election to exclude traffic in light wines and beer in county, was an interlocutory order and not a final order, requiring appeal therefrom within ten days in order to question sufficiency of petitions. Costas v. Board of Sup'rs, 196 Miss. 104, 15 So. 2d 365, 1943 Miss. LEXIS 6 (Miss. 1943).

Allowance of appeal with supersedeas in beer election case does not operate as a judicial license to continue operations in spite of adverse election and the consequent judgment of the tribunals of original jurisdiction. Early v. Board of Supervisors, 182 Miss. 636, 181 So. 132, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 163 (Miss. 1938).

If judgment in case in which validity of local option election is questioned is affirmed, all offenses against law during time appeal was pending are punishable as if no appeal had been taken regardless of supersedeas. Early v. Board of Supervisors, 182 Miss. 636, 181 So. 132, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 163 (Miss. 1938).

Refusal to allow amendment of pleadings, whereby it was sought to have registration books and poll books, and other records, brought up to ascertain percentage of qualified electors signing petition for election, was not error. Hamilton v. Long, 181 Miss. 627, 180 So. 615, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 103 (Miss. 1938).

Court properly affirmed supervisor’s order, in absence of error appearing on face of record. Hamilton v. Long, 181 Miss. 627, 180 So. 615, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 103 (Miss. 1938).

In certiorari proceedings to review order of supervisors calling election, facts regarding election and the report thereof by election commissioners, occurring subsequent to issuance of writ, were not part of record proper on hearing in circuit court, but consideration thereof did not harm party seeking writ where no error appeared in entire proceedings. Hamilton v. Long, 181 Miss. 627, 180 So. 615, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 103 (Miss. 1938).

Writ to review order of supervisors, held improvidently issued where exhibits recited all necessary jurisdictional facts entitling board to act. Hamilton v. Long, 181 Miss. 627, 180 So. 615, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 103 (Miss. 1938).

In petition for certiorari to review order of supervisors, it is only where ground for reversal appears from the record that circuit court can grant hearing on merits. Hamilton v. Long, 181 Miss. 627, 180 So. 615, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 103 (Miss. 1938).

Where affidavit accompanying petition for election stated petition contained more than twenty per cent of electors, but did not refer to number of qualified electors in county, but order of supervisors determining sufficiency of petition did state number of electors, supreme court was required to assume supervisors made independent investigation to determine if more than twenty per cent of qualified electors had signed petition. Moffett v. Board of Supervisors, 181 Miss. 419, 179 So. 352, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 84 (Miss. 1938).

On appeal from quashing of certiorari to review proceedings of board of county commissioners in calling election to determine whether sales of beer and light wines should be abolished, supreme court would not determine whether statute authorizing election was unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority where question was raised for first time on appeal. Adams v. Board of Sup'rs, 177 Miss. 403, 170 So. 684, 1936 Miss. LEXIS 253 (Miss. 1936).

Action of county board of supervisors, in ordering election to determine whether sales of beer and light wines should be abolished, is appealable by certiorari, as against contention that action was not judicial but merely ministerial. Mohundro v. Board of Sup'rs, 174 Miss. 512, 165 So. 124, 1936 Miss. LEXIS 194 (Miss. 1936).

10. Frequency of elections.

Statutory provision prohibiting holding of election, on question whether beer and light wines should be continued to be sold in county, more often than once in a designated period is inapplicable if election is for any reason invalid. Simpson County v. Burkett, 178 Miss. 44, 172 So. 329, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 184 (Miss. 1937).

11. Miscellaneous.

Affidavit charging that defendant did unlawfully sell beer contrary to statute was insufficient because of failure to allege that as result of election the sale of beer was not permitted in the county of alleged sale since such election was an essential element of the offense. May v. State, 209 Miss. 579, 47 So. 2d 887, 1950 Miss. LEXIS 416 (Miss. 1950).

Party obtaining void writ of prohibition could not complain of order vacating writ on ground judge did not have authority in vacation. Hamilton v. Long, 181 Miss. 627, 180 So. 615, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 103 (Miss. 1938).

Where no timely appeal or certiorari was taken to review judgment of board of supervisors that election to exclude sale of beer and wine was legal that electors had voted to exclude, and prohibiting sale thereof, validity of judgment could not be questioned in proceeding to prohibit prosecution for selling beer and wine. Blount v. Kerley, 180 Miss. 863, 178 So. 591, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 42 (Miss. 1938).

Holders of license for sale of beer and light wines were not entitled to challenge constitutionality of statute authorizing election to determine whether sales of beer and light wine should be abolished on ground that failure of statute to provide for notice constituted denial of due process, in absence of showing that if statute had provided for notice result would have been different as to holders of license. Adams v. Board of Sup'rs, 177 Miss. 403, 170 So. 684, 1936 Miss. LEXIS 253 (Miss. 1936).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

In dry county, where city is wet, person may not have beer in his or her possession outside of city limit. Gilliland, Sept. 16, 1992, A.G. Op. #92-0681.

A county board of supervisors is without authority to call an election on discontinuing the sale of beer and light wines in response to a petition therefor until an adjudication that the petition contains a sufficient number of signatures of qualified electors has been made and entered on the minutes of the board. Rogers, Sept. 10, A.G. Op. 04-0476.

No statute can be found prohibiting use of a single petition for both a referendum on alcoholic beverages under §67-1-11 and for beer and light wine under this section. Lamar, Sept. 13, 2004, A.G. Op. 04-0478.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 55 et seq.

10 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 151:30 (petition for local option election).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 11-17 (petitions or applications in local option elections).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 80 et seq.

§ 67-3-9. Local option elections in certain municipalities.

Any city in this state, having a population of not less than two thousand five hundred (2,500) according to the latest federal census; or any city in this state having a population of not less than one thousand five hundred (1,500) according to the latest federal census and located within three (3) miles of a city or county that permits the sale, receipt, storage and transportation for the purpose of sale of beer or light wine; at an election held for the purpose, under the election laws applicable to such city, may either prohibit or permit, except as otherwise provided under Section 67-9-1, the sale and the receipt, storage and transportation for the purpose of sale of beer and light wine. An election to determine whether such sale shall be permitted in cities wherein its sale is prohibited by law shall be ordered by the city council or mayor and board of aldermen or other governing body of such city for such city only, upon the presentation of a petition for such city to such governing board containing the names of twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such city asking for such election. In like manner, an election to determine whether such sale shall be prohibited in cities wherein its sale is permitted by law shall be ordered by the city council or mayor and board of aldermen or other governing board of such city for such city only, upon the presentation of a petition to such governing board containing the names of twenty percent (20%) of the duly qualified voters of such city asking for such election. No election on either question shall be held by any one (1) city more often than once in five (5) years.

Thirty (30) days’ notice shall be given to the qualified electors of such city in the manner prescribed by law upon the question of either permitting or prohibiting such sale, and the notice shall contain a statement of the question to be voted on at the election. The tickets to be used in the election shall have the following words printed thereon: “For the legal sale of light wine of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight”; and the words “Against the legal sale of light wine of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight,” next below. In making up his ticket the voter shall make a cross (X) opposite the words of his choice.

If in the election a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election shall vote “For the legal sale of light wine of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight,” then the city council or mayor and board of aldermen or other governing body shall pass the necessary order permitting the legal sale of such light wine and beer in such city. If in the election a majority of the qualified electors voting in the election shall vote “Against the legal sale of light wine of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight,” then the city council or mayor and board of aldermen or other governing body shall pass the necessary order prohibiting the sale of such light wine and beer in such city.

All laws or parts of laws in conflict with this section are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict only, this section being cumulative and supplementary.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10208.5; Laws, 1950, ch. 501, §§ 1-3; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 10; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 6; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 6; Laws, 2017, ch. 331, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved Mar. 13, 2017).

Amendment Notes —

The 2012 amendment in the first paragraph substituted “sale of beer and light wine” for “sale of beer of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” in the first sentence, and “more often” for “oftener” in the last sentence; rewrote the second and third paragraphs and made minor stylistic changes throughout.

The 2017 amendment, effective March 13, 2017, inserted “or any city in this state…for the purpose of sale of beer or light wine” in the first sentence.

Cross References —

Elections under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §§67-1-11 through67-1-15.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

Where the petition filed on January 15, 1985 was 126 registered voters short of the statutorily required 20 percent necessary to call a beer sales referendum, whereupon the board of alderman requested Attorney General opinion for guidance and, upon release of Attorney General’s opinion, petitioners gathered additional signatures, board properly accepted 126 validated names submitted on March 26, 1985 to supplement those on the petition as first filed, adjudged that the petition met the 20 percent requirement, and called the election. City of Clinton v. Smith, 493 So. 2d 331, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2555 (Miss. 1986).

Where no express deadline for the filing of petitions is fixed by statutes or order of the governing authority, additional signatures of registered voters may be added after the original filings if added within a reasonable time following the original filings, and provided further, that the governing authority be required to adjudge as of the date it determines to call the election that the number of validated signatures as of that day is adequate, and, where, as in this case, the delay was some 2 months and 10 days, several weeks of which were consumed in effort to obtain an Attorney General opinion, none of the 126 signatures submitted on March 25, 1985, and validated by the city clerk, was disqualified from consideration because of tardy filing. City of Clinton v. Smith, 493 So. 2d 331, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2555 (Miss. 1986).

Each signature of a registered voter, before that signature may be validated and counted toward the number of signatures required by statute, must appear upon a page which contains language expressing in an intelligible manner the desire of the signing party that a particular referendum election be called, that is, language sufficient that one reading it before signing would not likely be mislead as to the import of his or her signature. City of Clinton v. Smith, 493 So. 2d 331, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2555 (Miss. 1986).

Forty-five validated signatures on 6 petition pages containing no language advising signatories of the reason for affixing their signatures thereon could not be counted toward the 20 percent requirement to call a beer sales referendum election. City of Clinton v. Smith, 493 So. 2d 331, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2555 (Miss. 1986).

A petition asking the board of aldermen to call an election to determine whether or not beer could be lawfully sold in the city, which was regular and sufficient on its face, and contained an attorney’s affidavit that the signatures thereon were genuine, as well as the city clerk’s affidavit that the names of more than 20 per cent of the city’s qualified electors were on the petition, was sufficient to make a prima facie case for petitioners. Lee County Drys v. Anderson, 231 Miss. 222, 95 So. 2d 224, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 508 (Miss. 1957).

It was the duty of the mayor and board of aldermen to canvass the names on petition asking that an election be called to determine whether or not beer could be lawfully sold in the city, in order to determine whether or not such petition contained the required number of qualified voters, and to adjudicate this fact. Lee County Drys v. Anderson, 231 Miss. 222, 95 So. 2d 224, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 508 (Miss. 1957).

Where, upon appeal, the circuit judge correctly reversed the action of the mayor and board of supervisors in dismissing a petition asking that an election be held to determine whether or not beer could be lawfully sold in the city, it was error to fail to enter a judgment directing the mayor and the board of aldermen to call an election in accordance with this section. Lee County Drys v. Anderson, 231 Miss. 222, 95 So. 2d 224, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 508 (Miss. 1957).

Although the county in which the city was located had voted out beer under Code 1942, § 10208, in 1939, this would not prevent the city from holding an election under this section to determine whether or not beer could be sold therein. Lee County Drys v. Anderson, 231 Miss. 222, 95 So. 2d 224, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 508 (Miss. 1957).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

1988 census estimate is not viewed as official update or amendment to latest census; population figures of 1980 census and not those of 1988 estimate constitute “latest federal census” as contemplated by statute. Shepard, March 15, 1990, A.G. Op. #90-0161.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 55 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 90, 92.

§ 67-3-11. Homemade wine or beer.

  1. Every person shall have the right to make homemade wine for domestic or household uses only, free of all restraint by this chapter or otherwise, and no such election as provided for in Sections 67-3-7, 67-3-9 and 67-3-13, shall deprive any person of the right to make homemade wine for domestic or household uses only.
    1. Every person twenty-one (21) years of age or older shall have the right to make homemade beer for personal, family, domestic or household uses without restraint by this chapter or otherwise if the beer is made in a county or municipality in which the possession of light wine or beer is lawful.
    2. The maximum amount of homemade beer that a person may make in a calendar year shall not exceed:
      1. One hundred (100) gallons if there is only one (1) person over the age of twenty-one (21) years of age residing in the household; and
      2. Two hundred (200) gallons if there are two (2) or more persons over the age of twenty-one (21) years residing in the household.
    3. A person who makes homemade beer as authorized in this section may remove the beer from the premises of the household where it is made and transport the beer only for the purpose of participating in a bona fide exhibition, contest or competition where homemade beer is being tasted and judged; however, homemade beer may not be sold or offered for sale under any circumstances.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10209, 10227; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 2013, ch. 345, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2013.

Amendment Notes —

The 2013 amendment added (2).

Cross References —

Rule making it unlawful to manufacture intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-21.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

In charging offense of unlawful possession of wine, it is not necessary to negative exception of homemade wine. Forbert v. State, 179 Miss. 66, 174 So. 248, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 15 (Miss. 1937).

§ 67-3-13. Prohibition against possession of light wine and beer in dry counties; penalty; exceptions.

  1. Except as otherwise provided herein and as authorized under this section and Section 67-9-1, in any county which has at any time since February 26, 1934, elected, or which may hereafter elect, to prohibit the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of wine and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than four percent (4%) by weight in such county, it is hereby declared to be unlawful to possess such beverages therein. In any county which, after July 1, 1998, elects to prohibit the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of wine and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight in such county, it is hereby declared to be unlawful to possess such beer therein. In any county which, after July 1, 2012, elects to prohibit the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of wine of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight in such county and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight, it is hereby declared to be unlawful to possess such beer therein. Any person found possessing any beer or wine of any quantity whatsoever in such county shall, on conviction, be imprisoned not more than ninety (90) days or fined not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), or be both so fined and imprisoned.
  2. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, in any county or municipality in which the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of light wine and beer is prohibited, it shall not be unlawful for a permitted wholesaler or distributor to possess light wine and beer when such light wine and beer is held therein solely for the purpose of storage and for distribution to other counties and municipalities in which possession of such beverages is lawful.
  3. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (1) and (2) of this section, in any county in which transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of light wine and beer is prohibited, it shall not be unlawful:
    1. To receive, store, possess or consume light wine or beer at a resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5;
    2. To distribute and transport light wine or beer to a resort area as defined in Section 67-1-5;
    3. To transport beer of an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight if it is being transported to another state for legal sale in that state;
    4. To transport legally purchased light wine or beer in unopened containers if it is being transported on a state or federal highway; however, this paragraph shall not apply to a retailer unless the retailer has purchased the light wine or beer from a wholesaler or distributor for the designated sales territory in which the retailer is located and the retailer has in his possession an invoice from the wholesaler or distributor for the light wine or beer; or
    5. To transport homemade beer as authorized in Section 67-3-11.
  4. Any light wine or beer found in possession of, or sold by, a person in violation of this section shall be seized and disposed of in the manner provided for in Section 67-1-18.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10208; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1942, ch. 224; Laws, 1956, ch. 252; Laws, 1958, ch. 279; Laws, 1987, ch. 349; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 11; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 7; Laws, 2004, ch. 397, § 6; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 7; Laws, 2012, ch. 501, § 4; Laws, 2013, ch. 345, § 3; Laws, 2015, ch. 438, § 4, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 13, 2015); Laws, 2018, ch. 385, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 2018.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 4 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 30, 2012), amended this section. Section 7 of Chapter 323, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 4 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, which contains language that specifically provides that it supersedes §67-3-13 as amended by Laws of 2012, ch. 323.

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected a typographical error near the end of the second and third sentences of (1) by inserting the words “wine or” preceding “beer therein.” The Joint Committee ratified the correction at its August 16, 2012, meeting.

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected an error by adding “To” at the beginning of (d). The Joint Legislative Committee ratified the correction at its August 1, 2013, meeting.

Amendment Notes —

The 2004 amendment deleted “subsection (2) of” preceding “this section and Section 67-9-1” in the first sentence of (1); and added (3), which authorizes the sale of light wine or beer at qualified resort areas in counties in which the sale of light wine or beer is otherwise prohibited.

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323), added the next-to-last sentence in (1).

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 501), added the next-to-last sentence in (1); and added (3)(c).

The 2013 amendment added (3)(d); and made a minor stylistic change.

The 2015 amendment added (4).

The 2018 amendment, in (3), added (d), and redesignated former (d) as (e).

Cross References —

Seizure and sale of illegal beverages under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-17.

As to possession of alcoholic beverages, light wine and beer by person holding alcohol processing permit, see §67-9-1.

Rule making it unlawful to manufacture intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-21.

Rule making it unlawful to possess or sell intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-27.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Validity.

2. Construction.

3. Effect.

1. Validity.

Section 67-3-13 did not deny a defendant, who was convicted of possession of beer in a “dry” part of the county while traveling home after having legally purchased the beer in a “wet” city, equal protection under the laws and constitution of the State of Mississippi and the Constitution of the United States, nor was there any invasion of the defendant’s constitutional right of privacy. Dantzler v. State, 542 So. 2d 906, 1989 Miss. LEXIS 197 (Miss. 1989).

Chapter 279, Laws of 1958, is constitutional and valid, and states an enforceable and definite offense. Kelly v. State, 237 Miss. 112, 113 So. 2d 540, 1959 Miss. LEXIS 453 (Miss. 1959).

2. Construction.

Chapter 252, Laws of 1956, neither expressly nor by implication repealed Code 1942, § 10208.5. Lee County Drys v. Anderson, 231 Miss. 222, 95 So. 2d 224, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 508 (Miss. 1957).

It is not unlawful to possess beer having an alcoholic content of not more than 4 per cent by weight in a county where beer has been excluded by an election and neither is it unlawful to transport beer into such county for purposes of personal use or consumption. King v. Monaghan, 227 Miss. 251, 85 So. 2d 911, 1956 Miss. LEXIS 680 (Miss. 1956).

3. Effect.

Defendant’s conviction under Miss. Code Ann. §§67-3-13(1) (Supp. 2013) was reversed where missing from the evidence presented at trial and the jury instructions was any mention of the second essential element, i.e., that the county where the beer was purchased had elected to prohibit the sale and possession of beer. Davis v. State, 138 So.3d 965, 2014 Miss. App. LEXIS 259 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014).

Where police found a bottle of vodka and four cans of beer in defendant’s vehicle, he was arrested and charged with the offenses of possession of whiskey and possession of beer in a dry county; the failure of the police justice affidavit to cite to the Mississippi statute did not render the affidavit invalid, and the defendant was adequately notified of the nature and cause of the accusations against him. Loveless v. City of Booneville, 972 So. 2d 723, 2007 Miss. App. LEXIS 400 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007), cert. dismissed, 973 So. 2d 244, 2008 Miss. LEXIS 2 (Miss. 2008).

Where enforcement agents of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division, in the course of a lawful search for intoxicating liquor, discovered beer which was contraband in that county, it was lawful under the circumstances for the officers to seize the beer, and their testimony with respect to it was properly admitted in a prosecution for the illegal possession of beer. Gann v. State, 234 So. 2d 627, 1970 Miss. LEXIS 1415 (Miss. 1970).

Where the qualified electors of a county had rejected the proposition that beer had not more than four percent alcohol by weight be legalized, possession of beer in the county was illegal and continued to be so after the election whether its alcoholic content was more or less than four percent, and proof that an accused’s beer contained more than four percent of alcohol by weight was not necessary in order to convict the accused of the illegal possession of the beer. Gann v. State, 234 So. 2d 627, 1970 Miss. LEXIS 1415 (Miss. 1970).

A charge of unlawfully possessing beer must allege that it was in violation of this statute. Brown v. State, 241 Miss. 838, 133 So. 2d 529, 1961 Miss. LEXIS 408 (Miss. 1961).

The local option statutes, Chapter 171, Laws of 1934, and chapter 279, Laws of 1958, are so closely related that a valid affidavit charging an offense under subsection (b) of the 1958 Act must charge, among other averments, that the defendant had possession of alcoholic beverages in violation of the provisions of Chapter 279, Laws of 1958. Kelly v. State, 237 Miss. 112, 113 So. 2d 540, 1959 Miss. LEXIS 453 (Miss. 1959).

A charge that one had in his possession beer when the same was prohibited in the county as the result of an election to prohibit its transportation, storage, sale, distribution or manufacture, contrary to that form of the statute in such case made and provided, fails to state an offense. Kelly v. State, 237 Miss. 112, 113 So. 2d 540, 1959 Miss. LEXIS 453 (Miss. 1959).

In prosecution for unlawful distribution of beer in a county where such distribution has been outlawed by the vote of the people, this distribution is violation of this section regardless of the fact that the alcoholic content may be 4 per cent or less and it is unnecessary for the charge or the proof to show whether the alcoholic content was 4 per cent or more or less than that amount. Walton v. State, 219 Miss. 72, 68 So. 2d 87, 1953 Miss. LEXIS 371 (Miss. 1953).

Under a statute allowing the county to determine that it shall be unlawful to transport beer of alcoholic content of not more than 4 per cent, an indictment which charged violation of the statute but did not set out each step by which county effected its “determination” but stated what the county determined was sufficient. Hoyle v. State, 216 Miss. 330, 62 So. 2d 380, 1953 Miss. LEXIS 641 (Miss. 1953).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

A beer distributorship may be located in a dry jurisdiction, provided that the beer or light wine is held solely for the purpose of storage and distribution to wet counties and municipalities. Johnson, III, Nov. 30, 2001, A.G. Op. #01-0709.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 79 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 311 et seq., 380.

§ 67-3-15. Permit and/or license required.

  1. Any person who shall brew or manufacture or sell any beer or light wine without first having secured a permit and/or license from the commissioner authorizing the brewing or manufacture or sale of such liquor, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one (1) year, or both, in the discretion of the court. Any person so convicted may not apply for any permit or license issued by the commissioner until five (5) years have elapsed from the date of such conviction.
  2. This section shall not apply to beer authorized to be made pursuant to Section 67-3-11.
  3. Any light wine or beer found in possession of, or sold by, a person in violation of this section shall be seized and disposed of in the manner provided for in Section 67-1-18.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10212; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1997, ch. 499, § 10; Laws, 2000, ch. 435, § 8; Laws, 2013, ch. 345, § 4; Laws, 2015, ch. 438, § 5, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 13, 2015).

Amendment Notes —

The 2013 amendment added (2).

The 2015 amendment added (3).

Cross References —

Labelling of light wines and beer with respect to alcoholic content, see §27-71-509.

Issuance, revocation, etc., of permits under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §§67-1-51 to67-1-71.

Permits for sale of intoxicating liquors, see §§67-1-51 et seq.

Prohibition on manufacturers of light wine or beer acting as wholesalers or distributors, see §67-3-46.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

In a suit for the breach of a commercial lease, the tenant was not prohibited from claiming lost profits resulting from the club’s sale of beer and he did not have a license to sell beer where any failure in obtaining a liquor license was not a contributing cause of the damages that he tenant sought. Evans v. Clemons, 872 So. 2d 23, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 821 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. denied, 873 So. 2d 1032, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 475 (Miss. 2004).

Defendant who had not obtained license to sell beer and wine was not entitled to writ prohibiting prosecution before justice of peace on theory election to exclude sale was invalid. Blount v. Kerley, 180 Miss. 863, 178 So. 591, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 42 (Miss. 1938).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 87 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 90 et seq.

§ 67-3-17. Application for permit; oath.

  1. Any person desiring to engage in any business taxable under Sections 27-71-303 through 27-71-317, Mississippi Code of 1972, either as a retailer, or as a wholesaler or distributor, or as a manufacturer, of light wines or beer, shall file with the commissioner an application for a permit allowing him to engage in such business. The application for a permit shall contain a statement showing the name of the business, and if a partnership, firm, association or limited liability company, the name of each partner or member, and if a corporation the names of two (2) principal officers, the post office address, and the nature of business in which engaged. In case any business is conducted at two (2) or more separate places, a separate permit for each place of business shall be required. The commissioner shall prescribe the form of the application and designate who is required to sign the application.The application shall be signed under penalty of perjury.
  2. The application shall include a statement that the applicant will not, except as otherwise authorized in this chapter, allow any alcoholic beverages as defined in Section 67-1-5, any beer having an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight or any wine, having an alcoholic content of more than five percent (5%) by weight, to be kept, stored or secreted in or on the premises described in such permit or license, and that the applicant will not otherwise violate any law of this state, or knowingly allow any other person to violate any such law, while in or on such premises.
  3. Each application or filing made under this section shall include the social security number(s) of the applicant in accordance with Section 93-11-64, Mississippi Code of 1972.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10238; Laws, 1934, ch. 127; Laws, 1997, ch. 588, § 22; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 8; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 8; Laws, 2012, ch. 501, § 5; Laws, 2012, ch. 566, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 2012.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 8 of Chapter 323, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), Section 5 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 30, 2012) and Section 3 of Chapter 566, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved May 23, 2012), amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of all three amendments pursuant to Section 1-1-109, which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the August 16, 2012, meeting of the Committee.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws, 1997, ch. 588, § 150, provides as follows:

“SECTION 150. Any person or entity shall be absolutely immune from any liability arising from compliance with the dictates of this act unless such conduct by the person or entity is willful and intentional”.

Laws of 2012, ch. 566, § 10 provide:

“SECTION 10. Sections 8 and 9 of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage, and the remaining sections of this act shall take effect and be in force from and after July 1, 2012.”

Amendment Notes —

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323), substituted “alcoholic beverages as defined in Section 67-1-5, any beer having an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight or any” for “intoxicating liquor as defined by this chapter, including beer, wine and distilled spirits, or alcoholic, malt, or vinous liquors including beer and” in the second paragraph.

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 501), in the second paragraph, inserted “except as otherwise authorized in this chapter” and substituted “alcoholic beverages as defined in Section 67-1-5, any beer having an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight or any” for “intoxicating liquor as defined by this chapter, including beer, wine and distilled spirits, or alcoholic, malt, or vinous liquors including beer and.”

The third 2012 amendment (ch. 566), in (1), in the second paragraph, inserted “except as otherwise authorized in this chapter” and substituted “alcoholic beverages as defined in Section 67-1-5, any beer having an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight or any” for “intoxicating liquor as defined by this chapter, including beer, wine and distilled spirits, or alcoholic, malt, or vinous liquors including beer and” and made minor stylistic changes.

Cross References —

Applications for permits for sale of intoxicating liquors, see §§67-1-53 et seq.

Brewpub alcoholic content testing requirements, see §67-3-28.

Penalty for violation, see §67-3-69.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

In General.

In a suit for the breach of a commercial lease, the tenant was not prohibited from claiming lost profits resulting from the club’s sale of beer where he did not have a license to sell beer and any failure in obtaining a liquor license was not a contributing cause of the damages that he tenant sought. Evans v. Clemons, 872 So. 2d 23, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 821 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. denied, 873 So. 2d 1032, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 475 (Miss. 2004).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Transfer of retail liquor license or permit from one location to another. 98 A.L.R.2d 1123.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 118 et seq.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 21-44 (issuance or refusal to issue licenses).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 149 et seq.

§ 67-3-19. Qualifications of applicant for permit as retailer.

Where application is made for a permit to engage in the business of a retailer of light wine or beer, the applicant shall show in his application that he possesses the following qualifications:

Applicant must be a person at least twenty-one (21) years of age, of good moral character and a resident of the State of Mississippi.

Applicant shall not have been convicted of a felony, or of pandering or of keeping or maintaining a house of prostitution, or have been convicted within two (2) years of the date of his application of any violation of the laws of this state or the laws of the United States relating to alcoholic liquor.

Applicant shall not have had revoked, except for a violation of Section 67-3-52, within two (2) years next preceding his application, any license or permit issued to him pursuant to the laws of this state, or any other state, to sell alcoholic liquor of any kind.

Applicant shall be the owner of the premises for which the permit is sought or the holder of an existing lease thereon.

Applicant shall not be residentially domiciled with any person whose permit has been revoked for cause, except for a violation of Section 67-3-52, within two (2) years next preceding the date of the present application for a permit.

The applicant has not had any license or permit to sell beer or light wine at retail revoked, within five (5) years next preceding his application, due to a violation of Section 67-3-52.

Applicant shall not employ any person whose permit has been revoked when such person owned or operated the business on the premises for which a permit is sought or allow such person to have any financial interest in the business of the applicant, until such person is qualified to obtain a permit in his own name.

The applicant is not indebted to the State of Mississippi for any taxes.

If applicant is a partnership, all members of the partnership must be qualified to obtain a permit. Each member of the partnership must be a resident of the State of Mississippi.

If applicant is a corporation, all officers and directors thereof, and any stockholder owning more than five percent (5%) of the stock of such corporation, and the person or persons who shall conduct and manage the licensed premises for the corporation shall possess all the qualifications required herein for any individual permittee. However, the requirements as to residence shall not apply to officers, directors and stockholders of such corporation.

Any misstatement or concealment of fact in an application shall be ground for denial of the application or for revocation of the permit issued thereon.

The commissioner may refuse to issue a permit to an applicant for a place that is frequented by known criminals, prostitutes, or other law violators or troublemakers who disturb the peace and quietude of the community and frequently require the assistance of peace officers to apprehend such law violators or to restore order. The burden of proof of establishing the foregoing shall rest upon the commissioner.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10238-01; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, § 1; Laws, 1968, ch. 590, § 1; Laws, 1995, ch. 366, § 1; Laws, 1998, ch. 466, § 2; Laws, 2007, ch. 462, § 2, eff from and after passage (approved Mar. 26, 2007.).

Amendment Notes —

The 2007 amendment deleted “although such requirements shall apply to any officer, director, or stockholder who is also the manager of the licensed premises or who is engaged or employed at the licensed premises. The designated manager of the licensed premises must be a resident of the State of Mississippi” following “such corporation” at the end of (j).

Cross References —

Qualification of applicant for permit under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-57.

Prohibition on manufacturers of light wine or beer acting as wholesalers or distributors, see §67-3-46.

Sale of beer or light wine obtained from outside state, see §67-3-52.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

In a suit for the breach of a commercial lease, the tenant was not prohibited from claiming lost profits resulting from the club’s sale of beer where he did not have a license to sell beer and any failure in obtaining a liquor license was not a contributing cause of the damages that he tenant sought. Evans v. Clemons, 872 So. 2d 23, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 821 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. denied, 873 So. 2d 1032, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 475 (Miss. 2004).

Where local option applies, the state proposes to maintain control as to who may sell beer, as well as when and where. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

The rejection of an application for a license to sell beer at retail may not be arbitrary or capricious. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

By the terms of this section it is meant that the applicant for a license to sell beer at retail should make apparent or clear by evidence, testimony or reasoning, or prove or demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

The burden of showing the necessary moral character ordinarily rests upon the applicant for a license to sell beer. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

The granting of a permit to sell beer at retail ordinarily rests in the sound discretion of the official to whom the duty is committed, and the refusal to grant such permit deprives no one of any personal property right, but merely deprives him of the privilege which it is in the discretion of the proper authorities to grant or withhold. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

While if the law specially enjoined upon the state tax commissioner the duty to issue a permit to sell beer at retail, mandamus would be a proper remedy, but since the question whether the applicant possessed the requisite qualifications had to be determined by the commissioner, when he acted, he did so in the exercise of discretion and not ministerially. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

Since the commissioner, in denying the applicant a permit to sell beer at retail, was not acting ministerially but in the exercise of discretion, the action of the trial judge in refusing to grant the writ of mandamus was affirmed. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 114 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 146-148.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-3-21. Qualification of applicant for permit as distributor.

No permit shall be granted to a distributor unless the applicant therefor shall have been a resident of the State of Mississippi for at least two years.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10222; Laws, 1934, ch. 171.

Cross References —

Prohibition on manufacturers of light wine or beer acting as wholesalers or distributors, see §67-3-46.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 103, 121 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 164, 197.

§ 67-3-22. Brewpub production limits and unlawful acts.

  1. The production limits for a brewpub shall be based upon production as determined by the Department of Revenue pursuant to Section 27-71-307, Mississippi Code of 1972, and a brewpub shall not manufacture more than seventy-five thousand (75,000) gallons of light wine or beer per calendar year.
  2. Light wine or beer produced at a brewpub shall not be sold at a price less than it cost to manufacture such light wine or beer.
  3. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, light wine or beer manufactured by a brewpub shall not be sold away from the premises of such brewpub (as defined in Section 27-71-301, Mississippi Code of 1972) and shall not be packaged in any form that it may be carried away from the premises; however, the final one hundred (100) gallons of beer within a fermenting tank may be placed in kegs for sale on the premises to facilitate transition from one fermenting tank to another. A brewpub may sell light wine or beer manufactured by it for consumption off the premises of the brewpub if the light wine or beer so sold is contained in a growler.
  4. A brewpub shall be required to offer for sale light wine or beer that is normally carried on the inventory of wholesalers or distributors of light wine or beer.

HISTORY: Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 14, eff July 1, 1998, and shall stand repealed from and after July 1, 2002; Laws, 2002, ch. 305, § 1; Laws, 2017, ch. 345, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 2017.

Amendment Notes —

The 2017 amendment rewrote (1) to revise the beer production limits that apply to brewpubs; in (3), added the exception at the beginning, added the last sentence, and made a minor stylistic change; and deleted (5), which defined “hospitality operator.”

§ 67-3-23. Issuance, display, and transfer of permits.

Upon receipt of an application for a permit to engage in any business taxable under the provisions of Sections 27-71-303 through 27-71-317, Mississippi Code of 1972, and the oath required by Section 67-3-17, the commissioner shall issue to such applicant, without cost, a permit to engage in such business upon condition that the applicant shall obtain a license and pay the tax imposed under the provisions of law for the privilege of engaging, or continuing, in such business. Such permit shall be displayed at all times in some conspicuous place at the applicant’s place of business. No permit shall be transferable.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10238; Laws, 1934, ch. 127.

Cross References —

Responsibility of alcoholic beverage permit holder to furnish brands of beer or wine owned transported, sold or possessed to chairman of Tax Commission, see §27-71-503.

Labelling of light wines and beer with respect to alcoholic content, see §27-71-509.

Display of permits issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-61.

Transfer of permit issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-67.

Penalty for violation, see §67-3-69.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

In a suit for the breach of a commercial lease, the tenant was not prohibited from claiming lost profits resulting from the club’s sale of beer where he did not have a license to sell beer and any failure in obtaining a liquor license was not a contributing cause of the damages that he tenant sought. Evans v. Clemons, 872 So. 2d 23, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 821 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. denied, 873 So. 2d 1032, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 475 (Miss. 2004).

Where local option applies, the state proposes to maintain control as to who may sell beer, as well as when and where. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

The applicant for a license to sell beer at retail has no inherent right to the permit. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

The granting of a permit to sell beer at retail ordinarily rests in the sound discretion of the official to whom the duty is committed, and the refusal to grant such permit deprives no one of any personal property right, but merely deprives him of the privilege which it is in the discretion of the proper authorities to grant or withhold. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

The burden of showing the necessary moral character ordinarily rests upon the applicant for a license to sell beer. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

The rejection of an application for a license to sell beer at retail may not be arbitrary or capricious. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

Since the commissioner, in denying the applicant a permit to sell beer at retail, was not acting ministerially but in the exercise of discretion, the action of the trial judge in refusing to grant the writ of mandamus was affirmed. Powell v. State Tax Com., 233 Miss. 185, 101 So. 2d 350, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 368 (Miss. 1958).

Those who avail themselves of legislative privilege of engaging in sale of beer accept the privilege under the conditions attached to its exercise. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Transfer of retail liquor license or permit from one location to another. 98 A.L.R.2d 1123.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 134 et seq.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 21-44 (issuance or refusal to issue licenses).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors § 209.

§ 67-3-25. Sales authorized by permit; expiration of permit; annual renewal; temporary permits; contents of permit.

  1. Any permit issued authorizing the sale of light wines and/or beer for consumption shall be construed to authorize the sale of light wines and/or beer by the bottle, by the glass or by draught, and in or from the original package.
  2. The commissioner is authorized to establish, in his discretion, dates for the expiration of permits issued under this chapter.
  3. Except as otherwise provided in this section, permits shall be issued for twelve (12) months and shall be renewed annually on the first day of the month in which the permit expires. The commissioner may issue temporary permits for less than a full year. All permits shall show the effective date and expiration date of the permit, the business location, individual or business name and mailing address of the permittee.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10213, 10216; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1946, ch. 383; Laws, 1977, ch. 337; Laws, 2011, ch. 396, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2011.

Amendment Notes —

The 2011 amendment rewrote the section.

Cross References —

Renewal of permits for sale of intoxicating liquor, see §67-1-63.

§ 67-3-27. Licenses.

Before any person shall engage in the business of manufacturer, wholesaler, distributor or retailer of light wines or beer, he shall apply to the commissioner for a license to engage in such business, and shall pay to the commissioner the specific tax imposed by Section 27-71-303, for the privilege of engaging in such business. The commissioner upon receipt of such tax shall issue to such person a privilege license to engage in or continue in such business for a period of time not to exceed one (1) year. No such license shall be issued to the applicant unless such applicant shall have obtained from the commissioner a permit as required in Section 67-3-17. A brewpub shall obtain all necessary federal licenses and permits prior to obtaining any license under this chapter.

All privilege licenses issued under the provisions of this section shall be renewed annually on or before the first day of the month in which the current license expires.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10239; Laws, 1934, ch. 127; Laws, 1979, ch. 423, § 3; Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 9, eff from and after July 1, 1998.

Cross References —

Payment of excise or privilege tax on light wines or beers by persons licensed under this section, see §27-71-307.

Reports of wholesaler and preservation of invoices relating to alcoholic beverage taxes, see §27-71-325.

Other privilege tax not to be levied, see §27-71-343.

Privilege tax to be levied by municipality, see §27-71-345.

Prohibition on manufacturers of light wine or beer acting as wholesalers or distributors, see §67-3-46.

Penalty for violation, see §67-3-69.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Municipality may enforce municipal ordinance regarding sale of beer within 1500 feet of church against convenience stores notwithstanding fact that owner of one store has located store on basis of mayor’s assurance that location complied with ordinance and that municipality has allowed sale of beer at another convenience store for some 12 years; furthermore renewal of permits for stores to sell beer may be denied on basis of noncompliance with ordinance. Suggs v. Caledonia, 470 So. 2d 1055, 1985 Miss. LEXIS 2112 (Miss. 1985).

A licensee has no vested property right in a license to sell beer and light wines, which is simply a revocable permit or alienable privilege, with reference to a business which has long been recognized as peculiarly affecting the public interest and subject to governmental regulations. Miller v. Board of Supervisors, 230 Miss. 849, 94 So. 2d 604, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 431 (Miss. 1957).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 87 et seq.

15 Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 21-44 (issuance or refusal to issue licenses).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 126 et seq.

§ 67-3-28. Brewpub alcoholic content testing requirements.

  1. Any person desiring to engage in business as a brewpub shall file with the commissioner, along with the application required by Section 67-3-17, Mississippi Code of 1972, a certificate issued by a licensed testing laboratory indicating that such laboratory has tested a sample of the applicant’s beer or light wine, or both, and that the alcohol content of such sample of beer does not exceed eight percent (8%) by weight and the alcoholic content of such light wine does not exceed five percent (5%) by weight.
  2. Every brewpub shall be required to submit to random testing by the commissioner to determine whether any beer being manufactured, sold, kept, stored or secreted by the license holder contains an alcohol content greater than eight percent (8%) by weight and any light wine being manufactured, sold, kept, stored or secreted by the license holder contains an alcoholic content greater than five percent (5%) by weight. The commissioner shall establish and administer testing standards and procedures to be used in such random testing. The brewpub licensee shall be responsible for all costs incurred by the commissioner in conducting random testing under this section.

HISTORY: Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 15; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 9, eff from and after July 1, 2012.

Amendment Notes —

The 2012 amendment substituted “sample of beer does not exceed eight percent (8%) by weight and the alcoholic content of such light wine does not exceed five percent (5%) by weight” for “sample does not exceed four percent (4%) by weight.” at the end of (1); and rewrote the first sentence in (2).

§ 67-3-29. Revocation or suspension of permit by commissioner.

  1. The commissioner, or a hearing officer or the board of review, as designated by the commissioner, after a show cause hearing, shall revoke or suspend any permit granted by authority of this chapter to any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this chapter or the revenue laws of this state relating to engaging in transporting, storing, selling, distributing, possessing, receiving or manufacturing of wines or beers, or any person who shall hereafter be convicted of the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor, or any person who shall allow or permit any form of illegal gambling or immorality on the premises described in such permit. The commissioner shall not revoke or suspend a permit of a retailer for the sale of light wine or beer to a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years until there has been a conviction of the permit holder or an employee of the permit holder for such violation.
  2. If any person exercising any privilege taxable under the provisions of Chapter 71 of Title 27, Mississippi Code of 1972, shall willfully neglect or refuse to comply with the provisions of such chapter, or any rules or regulations promulgated by the commissioner under authority of such chapter, or the provisions of this chapter, including maintaining the qualifications of an applicant under Section 67-3-19, during the permit period, the commissioner shall be authorized to revoke or suspend the permit theretofore issued to the person. Any person whose permit shall have been revoked by the commissioner shall be thereafter prohibited from exercising any privilege under the provisions of Chapter 71 of Title 27, Mississippi Code of 1972, for a period of two (2) years from the date of the revocation. The commissioner may, however, for good cause shown, grant a new permit upon such conditions as the commissioner may prescribe. Any person whose permit shall have been suspended by the commissioner shall be prohibited from exercising any privilege under the provisions of Chapter 71 of Title 27, Mississippi Code of 1972, during the period of the suspension. Failure of the person to comply with the terms of the suspension shall be cause for revocation of his permit, in addition to the other penalties provided by law.
  3. In addition to the reasons specified in this section and other provisions of this chapter, the commissioner shall be authorized to suspend the permit of any permit holder for being out of compliance with an order for support, as defined in Section 93-11-153. The procedure for suspension of a permit for being out of compliance with an order for support, and the procedure for the reissuance or reinstatement of a permit suspended for that purpose, and the payment of any fees for the reissuance or reinstatement of a permit suspended for that purpose, shall be governed by Section 93-11-157 or Section 93-11-163, as the case may be. If there is any conflict between any provision of Section 93-11-157 or Section 93-11-163 and any provision of this chapter, the provisions of Section 93-11-157 or 93-11-163, as the case may be, shall control.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10213, 10257; Laws, 1934, chs. 127, 171; Laws, 1946, ch. 383; Laws, 1973, ch. 467, § 2; Laws, 1991, ch. 368, § 2; Laws, 1996, ch. 507, § 18; Laws, 2005, ch. 499, § 31, eff from and after July 1, 2005.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected a publishing error in subsection (1) of this section. The sentence “The commissioner shall not revoke or suspend a permit of a retailer for the sale of light wine or beer to a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years until there has been a conviction of the permit holder or an employee of the permit holder for such violation” was added at the end. The Joint Committee ratified the correction at its June 3, 2003 meeting.

Amendment Notes —

The 2005 amendment substituted “or a hearing officer or the board of review, as designated by the commissioner, after a show cause hearing shall revoke or suspend” for “shall revoke” following “The commissioner” near the beginning of (1); rewrote the first sentence of (2); and made minor stylistic changes throughout.

Cross References —

Suspension and revocation of permits issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-71.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Sections authorizing revocation of permit for wholesale distribution of beer under certain prescribed circumstances upon giving notice as required by Code 1942, § 10257, are constitutional. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

A permit or license for the wholesale distribution of beer is not a property or contract right, and its revocation need seek no judicial sanction, nor is a judicial proceeding available to forbid the proper exercise of such revocation. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

Although ordinarily a license may have aspects of property, the control retained in respect to the granting of a permit for wholesale distribution of beer strips the permit of that quality which requires divestiture only by judicial process. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

Those who avail themselves of legislative privilege of engaging in sale of beer accept the privilege under the conditions attached to its exercise. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

While absolute administrative power to revoke permit for wholesale distribution of beer excludes judicial review where exercised under condition of its bestowal, it does not imply arbitrary or capricious exercise. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

Administrative questions regarding revocation of permit for wholesale distribution of beer belong within the legislative orbit, and, although judicial oversight can never be absolutely forbidden, it is measured by the same considerations which apply to direct legislative acts. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

Order of commissioner revoking permit for wholesale distribution of beer upon sufficient grounds prescribed in the sections authorizing such revocation, after notice as required by Code 1942, § 10257 and a hearing, was final, where the notice to the permit holder set out the grounds for such revocation which were confirmed by the commissioner’s order. Stone v. Farish, 199 Miss. 186, 23 So. 2d 911, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 280 (Miss. 1945).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 148 et seq.

1A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Administrative Law, Form 341.2 (complaint, petition, or declaration – by license holder – against administrative agency – to enjoin further proceedings to suspend or revoke license – attempt to suspend or revoke license on grounds not listed in statute authorizing suspension or revocation of license).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 61-84 (revocation or suspension of licenses).

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 222 et seq.

§ 67-3-31. Judicial revocation or suspension of permit; affidavit and complaint.

Proceedings for the revocation or suspension of any permit authorizing the sale of beer or wine at retail for a violation of any of the provisions of Section 67-3-53 may be brought in the circuit or county court of the county in which the licensed premises are located. Such proceedings shall be entitled in the name of the state and against the permittee and shall be instituted by filing a complaint with the clerk of the court. The complaint may be filed by the county prosecuting attorney of the county upon his own initiative or, then by the district attorney of the district in which the county is located, and it shall be mandatory upon the county prosecuting attorney, or district attorney, as the case may be, to file a complaint when requested to do so by a peace officer or any person as provided in this section. Any peace officer within his jurisdiction or any enforcement officer of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division within the Department of Revenue who learns that a retail permittee within his jurisdiction has violated any of the provisions of such section shall file with the county prosecuting attorney of the county in which the licensed premises are located, or, then with the district attorney of the district in which such county is located, an affidavit specifying in detail the facts alleged to constitute such violation, and requesting that a complaint be filed against the permittee for the revocation or suspension of his permit. A like affidavit may be filed with the county prosecuting attorney, or district attorney, as the case may be, by any person who resides, and has for at least one (1) year prior thereto resided within the county in which the licensed premises are located requesting that a complaint be filed for the revocation or suspension of the permittee’s permit. Promptly upon receiving any such affidavit the county prosecuting attorney, or district attorney, shall prepare a proper complaint, which shall be signed and sworn to by the person or persons filing the affidavit with him, and the county prosecuting attorney or district attorney shall file the complaint with the clerk of the circuit or county court.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10223; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, §§ 2-4; Laws, 1997, ch. 558, § 3; reenacted and amended, 1998, ch. 520, § 2; Laws, 2003, ch. 392, § 2; Laws, 2005, ch. 462, § 2; Laws, 2007, ch. 462, § 4; Laws, 2011, ch. 379, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2011.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 1998, ch. 520, § 5, provides as follows:

“SECTION 5. Section 5, Chapter 558, Laws of 1997, which repeals, effective July 1, 1998, Sections 67-1-37, 67-3-31, 67-3-37 and 67-3-75, Mississippi Code of 1972, is repealed.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2003 amendment substituted “July 1, 2005” for “July 1, 2003” in the bracketed language appearing at the beginning of each version of the section.

The 2005 amendment extended the repeal date of the first version from “July 1, 2005” until “July 1, 2007”; and extended the effective date of the second version from “July 1, 2005” until “July 1, 2007.”

The 2007 amendment, in both versions of the section, substituted “2011” for “2007” in the bracketed effective date language, and at the end of the third sentence, substituted “person as provided in this section” for “person as hereinafter provided.”

The 2011 amendment substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission” in the third sentence; and deleted the version of the section effective from and after July 1, 2011.

Cross References —

Suspension and revocation of permits issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-71.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 157, 158 et seq.

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Intoxicating Liquors, Forms 61-84 (revocation or suspension of licenses).

§ 67-3-33. Judicial revocation or suspension of permit; service of notice.

Upon filing a complaint with the clerk of the court, the county prosecuting attorney or district attorney filing the same shall promptly move the court to set the complaint for hearing. The court shall set the complaint for hearing at an early date in term time or in vacation and such proceedings shall have precedence for trial over all civil actions. Upon a date for trial being set by the court, the county prosecuting attorney or district attorney shall serve or cause to be served upon the permittee in accordance with the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure a notice of the filing of said complaint, together with a copy of said complaint, and shall set forth in said notice the time and place of the hearing thereon. Said notice shall be served upon the permittee at least ten (10) days prior to the date set for hearing if personal service be made. If service be made by mail, such notice shall be deposited in the United States mail not less than twelve (12) days prior to the date set for hearing. A copy of said complaint and notice of hearing thereon shall also be mailed to the commissioner by the county prosecuting attorney or district attorney.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10223; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, §§ 2-4; Laws, 1991, ch. 573, § 118, eff from and after July 1, 1991.

Cross References —

Suspension and revocation of permits issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-71.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 157, 158 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 234 et seq.

§ 67-3-35. Judicial revocation or suspension of permit; hearing and judgment.

The complaint shall be heard by the court without a jury. If the court shall find upon the hearing that the offense or offenses charged in the complaint have been established by the evidence, the court shall order the revocation or suspension of the permit. If the court finds that the permittee has not previously violated the law in the operation of his licensed business, and that no permit or license held by him has previously been suspended or revoked, and if it appears to the satisfaction of the court that there is reasonable ground to expect that the permittee will not again commit the offense or offenses charged in the complaint and that to revoke the permit would be unduly severe, then the court may suspend the permit for such period of time as the court deems proper. However, if the permittee has previously had his permit suspended or revoked, it shall be mandatory upon the court upon a finding of guilty to revoke the said permit. The judgment of the court revoking or suspending such permit shall not be superseded or stayed during the pendency of an appeal therefrom. A certified copy of the final order or decree of the court shall be forwarded by the clerk of the court to the commissioner.

After the filing of a complaint with the clerk of the court for the revocation or suspension of a permit, the court in which the complaint is filed shall retain jurisdiction to hear and determine such complaint and to enter judgment revoking or suspending such permit. For the purpose of such hearing and as to the effect of the judgment of the court entered pursuant thereto, the permit shall be in full force and effect even though the permittee, after filing of such complaint, may have surrendered his permit, or such permit may have expired, or the rights of the permittee thereunder may have otherwise terminated. It is the purpose of this section to preclude the permittee from avoiding the effect of a judgment of revocation by a court by reason of conditions arising subsequent to the filing of a complaint.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10223; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, §§ 2-4.

Cross References —

Suspension and revocation of permits issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-71.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 157, 158 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 234 et seq.

§ 67-3-37. Judicial revocation or suspension of permit; enforcement.

It shall be the duty of the county prosecuting attorney or the district attorney, as the case may be, to file complaints as provided in Section 67-3-31 and to prosecute diligently and without delay all complaints filed by him.

It shall be the duty of all peace officers, within their jurisdiction, and all enforcement officers of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the Department of Revenue to enforce the provisions of Section 67-3-53 and they shall frequently visit all licensed premises within their jurisdiction to determine whether such permittees are complying with the laws. They shall promptly investigate all complaints made to them by any citizen relative to any alleged violations of such section within their jurisdiction. When any peace officer or enforcement officer of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division has knowledge of a violation of such section committed by a permittee within his jurisdiction, it shall be his duty forthwith to file an affidavit with the county prosecuting attorney or district attorney requesting that a complaint be filed for the revocation or suspension of the permit of the permittee.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10223; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, §§ 2-4; Laws, 1997, ch. 558, § 4; reenacted and amended, 1998, ch. 520, § 3; Laws, 2002, ch. 570, § 8; Laws, 2003, ch. 392, § 3; Laws, 2005, ch. 462, § 3; Laws, 2007, ch. 462, § 5; Laws, 2011, ch. 379, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 2011.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 1998, ch. 520, § 5, provides as follows:

“SECTION 5. Section 5, Chapter 558, Laws of 1997, which repeals, effective July 1, 1998, Sections 67-1-37, 67-3-31, 67-3-37 and 67-3-75, Mississippi Code of 1972, is repealed.”

Amendment Notes —

The 2003 amendment substituted “July 1, 2005” for “July 1, 2003” in the bracketed language appearing at the beginning of each version of the section.

The 2005 amendment extended the repeal date of the first version from “July 1, 2005” until “July 1, 2007”; and extended the effective date of the second version from “July 1, 2005” until “July 1, 2007.”

The 2007 amendment substituted “2011” for “2007” in the bracketed effective date language of both versions.

The 2011 amendment substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission” in the first sentence in the second paragraph; and deleted the version of the section effective from and after July 1, 2011.

Cross References —

Suspension and revocation of permits issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-71.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

The Mississippi Light Wines and Beer Law does not confer upon agents of the state tax commission rights of inspection similar to those conferred upon agents of the alcoholic beverage commission under Code 1942, § 10265-17. Jolliff v. State, 215 So. 2d 234, 1968 Miss. LEXIS 1338 (Miss. 1968), overruled, Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982), but see Cumbest v. Commissioners of Election, 416 So. 2d 683, 1982 Miss. LEXIS 2053 (Miss. 1982).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 160.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors § 225.

§ 67-3-39. Judicial revocation or suspension of permit; jurisdiction of courts is not exclusive.

The jurisdiction conferred upon the circuit and county courts to hear and determine complaints for the revocation or suspension of permits shall not be exclusive and any authority conferred on the commissioner to revoke or suspend licenses shall remain in full force and effect, and the commissioner shall have authority to revoke or suspend permits for a violation of Section 67-3-53 in the manner provided in subsection (2) of Section 67-3-29 for the revocation of permits. However, when a complaint is filed with the court any proceedings which may then be pending before the commissioner against the same permittee on the same charges shall abate and no proceedings for the revocation or suspension of a permit for a violation of the provisions of Section 67-3-53 shall be filed with the commissioner when proceedings are pending before the court against the permittee on the same charges. The revocation or suspension of a permittee’s state permit by the court or by the commissioner shall automatically revoke or suspend any municipal license or permit held by such person. The revocation or suspension of a permittee’s permit shall be in addition to and not in lieu of or limitation of any other penalty imposed by law.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10223; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, §§ 2-4.

Cross References —

Suspension and revocation of permits issued under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-71.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 157, 158 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 234 et seq.

§ 67-3-41. Judicial revocation or suspension of permit; sections are cumulative.

Sections 67-3-31 through 67-3-41 and Section 67-3-53 are declared to be cumulative, amendatory, and supplemental to any and all other acts and laws of this state pertaining to the governing of the sale and distribution of light wines and beers as contained in Sections 27-71-301 through 27-71-347, Mississippi Code of 1972, and Sections 67-3-17, 67-3-23, 67-3-27, 67-3-29(2), 67-3-55, and 67-3-57.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10223; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, §§ 2-4.

§ 67-3-43. Repealed.

Repealed by Laws of 1973, ch. 467, § 3, eff from and after passage (approved April 9, 1973).

[Codes, 1942, § 10223.5; Laws, 1962, ch. 326]

Editor’s Notes —

The substance of former §67-3-43, relative to possession or sale of untaxed beer, or possession or sale of light wine or beer without proper permits, is now found in the second paragraph of §67-3-57.

§ 67-3-45. Loans and extension of credit to retailers prohibited; brewpub exemption.

No manufacturer, distributor or wholesale dealer to whom or to which this chapter applies shall:

Make any loan, directly or indirectly, or furnish any fixtures of any kind, directly or indirectly, to any retail dealer in light wines and/or beer;

Have any interest, direct or indirect, in the business of or in the furnishings or fixtures or in the premises used by any such retail dealer in connection with his or its business;

Have any lien on any such property of any such retail dealer; or

Sell light wines and/or beer to any such retail dealer on credit.

This section shall not apply to a brewpub licensed pursuant to Article 3, Chapter 71, Title 27, Mississippi Code of 1972.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10214; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1966, ch. 656, § 1; Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 10, eff from and after July 1, 1998.

Cross References —

Prohibition of credit to retailers under local option alcohol beverage control law, see §67-1-79.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 94.

CJS.

48A C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors § 695-698.

§ 67-3-46. Manufacturers of light wines or beer prohibited from acting as wholesalers or distributors.

  1. The provisions of subsection (2) of this section apply to the following entities:
    1. Any person engaged in the business of brewing or manufacturing beer or in the business of manufacturing or producing light wines;
    2. An officer, director, agent or employee of an entity described in paragraph (a) of this subsection;
    3. An affiliate of an entity described in paragraph (a) of this subsection, regardless of whether the affiliation is corporate or by management, direction or control.
  2. No entity named in subsection (1) of this section may have any interest in the license, business, assets or corporate stock of a wholesaler or distributor to whom this chapter applies, except a security interest granted to the entity of the type provided for the uniform commercial code in products sold to a wholesaler or distributor until the full purchase price has been paid therefor.

HISTORY: Laws, 1980, ch. 342, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 1980.

Cross References —

License tax on retailers, wholesalers and manufacturers of light wines and beer, see §27-71-303.

Requirement of license or permit for brewing, manufacturing or selling beer or light wine, see §67-3-15.

Qualifications of retailer of beer or light wine, see §67-3-19.

Qualifications for permit for distribution of beer or light wine, see §67-3-21.

Licenses for wholesalers, retailers, manufacturers or distributors of beer or light wines, see §67-3-27.

Native wines, see §§67-5-1 et seq.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Mississippi Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act.

Circuit court erred in dismissing a wholesaler’s complaint for failure to state a claim because the wholesaler alleged that the Mississippi Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act rendered the match-and-redirect provision of the parties’ distribution contract null and void, and a beer supplier’s demands premised on the void provision could have amounted to unjustified “interference” with the wholesaler’s transfer to an allegedly qualified transferee. Rex Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 271 So.3d 445, 2019 Miss. LEXIS 205 (Miss. 2019).

§ 67-3-47. Manufacturer of beer operating brewery permitted to provide limited amounts of beer on premises for tasting or sampling subject to certain conditions.

  1. A person having a permit to manufacture or brew beer under this chapter and who operates a brewery may offer and provide limited amounts of beer on the premises of the brewery for the purpose of tasting or sampling, subject to the following conditions:
    1. The beer provided for tasting or sampling must be manufactured in the State of Mississippi by the holder of the permit;
    2. The beer may be provided only to persons on the premises of the brewery at no cost and for consumption on the premises of the brewery;
    3. The beer may be provided for tasting or sampling between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on the same day and only in conjunction with a structured tour of the brewery and related facilities which must include the entire manufacturing and brewing processes and methods used at the brewery;
    4. No one under twenty-one (21) years of age may participate in the tasting or sampling, and a sign indicating that prohibition shall be placed in a visible location at the entrance to the area where the tasting or sampling will be conducted;
    5. An individual size sample of beer shall not exceed six (6) ounces, and no more than six (6) samples of beer may be provided to an individual within a twenty-four-hour period; and
    6. The holder of the license operating the brewery shall keep an accurate accounting of the various beers provided and consumed as samples.
  2. For the purposes of this section, the term ‘brewery‘ means and has the same definition as that term has in 26 USCS 5402.

HISTORY: Laws, 2012, ch. 569, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2012.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2012, ch. 569, § 5, provides:

“SECTION 5. Section 1 of this act shall be codified as a separate section in Chapter 3, Title 67, Mississippi Code of 1972.”

A former §67-3-47 [Codes, 1942, § 10215; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1986, ch. 337, § 7; Repealed by Laws, 1997, ch. 499, § 13, effective from and after July 1, 1997] provided a prohibition against unauthorized use of labels or markings of identification.

§ 67-3-48. Retail sale of light wine or beer produced by small craft brewery.

  1. A small craft brewery may sell at retail light wine or beer produced at its brewery for consumption on the premises of the brewery and consumption off the premises of the brewery if the sales are made on the premises of the brewery and the light wine or beer products offered for sale are also made available for sale to wholesalers.
    1. A small craft brewery shall not sell at retail more than ten percent (10%) of the light wine or beer produced annually at its brewery or more than one thousand five hundred (1,500) barrels of light wine or beer produced at the brewery annually, whichever is the lesser amount. For purposes of this subsection, contract-brewed beer shall not be included in the amount of beer produced annually at the brewery. The light wine or beer must be sold at a price approximating retail prices generally charged for identical beverages in the county where the brewery is located.
    2. A small craft brewery shall not make retail sales of more than five hundred seventy-six (576) ounces, in the aggregate, of light wine or beer to any one (1) individual for consumption off the premises of the brewery within a twenty-four-hour period.
    3. The limits on sales provided for in this subsection shall not apply to beer provided pursuant to Section 67-3-47.
  2. A small craft brewery shall take commercially reasonable steps to ensure that light wine or beer products sold for consumption off the premises of the brewery are being sold for personal use and not for resale and are not being sold to anyone holding a retail permit for the purpose of resale in their establishment.
  3. A small craft brewery shall not make retail sales of contract-brewed beer.
  4. A small craft brewery shall not mail or ship light wine or beer to a consumer.

HISTORY: Laws, 2017, ch. 345, § 1, effective from and after July 1, 2017.

Editor’s Notes —

Former §67-3-48 required the State Tax Commission to provide suitable labels or markings of identification for the purpose of taxation of beer inspected and authorized by the commission to be sold, and prohibited the unauthorized use of such labels.

A former §67-3-48 [Laws, 1997, ch. 499, § 2, effective from and after July 1, 1997; Repealed by Laws of 2000, ch. 435, § 12, effective from and after July 1, 2000] required the State Tax Commission to provide suitable labels or markings of identification for the purpose of taxation of beer inspected and authorized by the commission to be sold, and prohibited the unauthorized use of such labels.

Cross References —

Small craft breweries required to file monthly reports regarding the sale of light wine or beer authorized under this section, see §27-71-307.

Bond required of manufacturer operation small craft brewery who is distributing light wine or beer for sale as authorized by this section, see §27-71-311.

Penalty for violation of this section, see §67-3-69.

§ 67-3-48.1. Operation of small craft brewery acquired by or acquiring manufacturer of light wine or beer not meeting definition of small craft brewery.

  1. In the event a small craft brewery is acquired by an entity that manufactures light wine or beer that does not fall within the definition of the term “small craft brewery,” the entity that acquired the small craft brewery may continue to operate the brewery as a small craft brewery for as long as the acquired facility meets the definition of the term “small craft brewery”; however, the limit in Section 67-3-3 on the amount of barrels of light wine or beer that a small craft brewery may produce shall not apply to light wine or beer that is not produced by the acquired small craft brewery.
  2. In the event a small craft brewery acquires an entity that manufactures light wine or beer that does not fall within the definition of the term “small craft brewery,” the small craft brewery that acquired the entity may continue to operate as a small craft brewery for as long as the brewery meets the definition of the term “small craft brewery.”The light wine or beer produced by the entity that is acquired by a small craft brewery shall not apply to the limit in Section 67-3-3 on the amount of light wine or beer that the small craft brewery may produce.
  3. A small craft brewery described in subsections (1) and (2) of this section may continue to sell at retail brands the small craft brewery produces on its premises at all locations at which it was selling the brands at retail at the time of the acquisition; however, the small craft brewery may not sell at retail brands produced by the entity that acquired it or by the entity it acquires, as the case may be.

HISTORY: Laws, 2017, ch. 345, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2017.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected an error in subsection (1) by substituting “that acquired the small craft brewery” for “that acquired small craft brewery.” The Joint Committee ratified the correction at the August 15, 2017, meeting.

§ 67-3-49. Manufacture, sale or storage of light wine with alcoholic content of more than 5% or beer with alcoholic content of more than 8% prohibited; exception.

  1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, it shall be unlawful for any brewer or manufacturer or distributor or wholesale dealer of or in light wines and/or beer to manufacture or knowingly bring upon his premises or keep thereon any wine of an alcoholic content of more than five percent (5%) by weight and beer of an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight, or any distilled spirits of any alcoholic content whatsoever. Any person that shall add to or mix with any beer or light wine any alcoholic or other liquid, or any alcohol cube or cubes, or any other ingredient or ingredients that will increase or tend to increase the alcoholic content of such liquor, or any person that shall knowingly offer for sale any liquor so treated, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished as hereinafter provided in this chapter. The commissioner shall take any action he considers necessary to ensure that light wine and/or beer manufactured at a brewpub complies with the provisions of this section.
  2. A brewer or manufacturer of light wine or beer may manufacture and keep upon his premises beer of an alcoholic content of more than eight percent (8%) by weight if the beer is manufactured for legal sale in another state.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10219; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 9; Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 11; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 10; Laws, 2012, ch. 501, § 6, eff from and after July 1, 2012.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 6 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 30, 2012), amended this section. Section 10 of Chapter 323, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 6 of Chapter 501, Laws of 2012, which contains language that specifically provides that it supersedes §67-3-49 as amended by Laws of 2012, ch.323.

Editor’s Notes —

Section 9 of ch. 306, Laws, 1998, effective July 1, 1998, amended this section. Section 11 of ch. 308, Laws, 1998, effective July 1, 1998, also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of both amendments pursuant to Section 1-1-109 which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the May 20, 1998 meeting of the Committee.

Amendment Notes —

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323), in the first sentence, deleted “beer or” preceding “wine of an alcoholic content of not more than five percent (5%) by weight” and added “and beer of an alcoholic content of not more than eight percent (8%) by weight” thereafter.

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 501), rewrote the first sentence in (1); and added (2).

Cross References —

Rule making it unlawful to manufacture intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-21.

Rule making it unlawful to possess or sell intoxicating liquors, see §97-31-27.

§ 67-3-51. Sales from other than original containers prohibited; exception.

  1. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, or offer to sell, or keep for sale any bottled beer or bottled light wine except the same be in the original bottle or in the original package containing bottles, each of which bottles shall bear the original label and the full name of the brewer or manufacturer of the contents of such bottle, both on the label and on the cap or cork of such bottle in the case of beer, and on the label only in the case of light wine.
  2. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, or offer for sale, or keep for sale any beer or light wine in the original package or packages unless each such original package (whether barrel or other container, and whether containing liquor in bottles or otherwise) shall have plainly stamped on the container or label for each such container the full name of the manufacturer of the liquor therein contained.
  3. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell on draught any beer or light wine except the same be drawn from the original barrel or other container, which such container shall have plainly stamped on each end thereof the full name of the manufacturer of such liquor.
  4. This section shall not apply to beer offered and provided on the premises of a brewery for the purpose of tasting or sampling as authorized in Section 67-3-47.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10220; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1987, ch. 355, § 3; Laws, 2012, ch. 569, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2012.

Amendment Notes —

The 2012 amendment added (4).

Cross References —

Labeling requirements concerning light wines and beer, see §27-71-509.

§ 67-3-52. Sale of beer or light wine obtained outside state.

It shall be unlawful for any person holding a permit authorizing the sale of beer or light wine at retail to obtain such beer or light wine from any source outside of the State of Mississippi. Any person who violates the provisions of this section, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court. Any person convicted of violating this section, or any rules or regulations promulgated by the commissioner with regard to the unlawful acts described in this section, shall forfeit his permit. Any person whose permit has been forfeited pursuant to this section shall not be eligible for a permit issued by the commissioner for a period of five (5) years after the date of such forfeiture. In addition, no permit shall be issued for the same location, for which an offender has forfeited a permit pursuant to this section, to a spouse, offspring or sibling of the offender when to do so would circumvent the purposes of this section. The commissioner may assess a retailer who violates this section the amount of excise taxes due on the unlawfully imported beer or light wine, together with a penalty in the amount of four (4) times the state excise taxes due or One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per case, whichever is greater.

HISTORY: Laws, 1997, ch. 499, § 1; Laws, 1998, ch. 466, § 1; Laws, 2000, ch. 435, § 9, eff from and after July 1, 2000.

§ 67-3-53. Unlawful acts.

In addition to any act declared to be unlawful by this chapter, or by Sections 27-71-301 through 27-71-347, and Sections 67-3-17, 67-3-27, 67-3-29 and 67-3-57, it shall be unlawful for the holder of a permit authorizing the sale of beer or light wine at retail or a small craft brewery selling light wine or beer at retail pursuant to Section 67-3-48 or for the employee of the holder of such a permit or the employee of such a brewery:

To sell or give to be consumed in or upon any licensed premises or in or upon the premises of a small craft brewery any beer or light wine between the hours of midnight and seven o’clock the following morning or during any time the licensed premises may be required to be closed by municipal ordinance or order of the board of supervisors; however, in areas where the sale of alcoholic beverages is legal under the provisions of the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law and the hours for selling those alcoholic beverages have been extended beyond midnight for on-premises permittees under Section 67-1-37, the hours for selling beer or light wines are likewise extended in areas where the sale of beer and light wines is legal in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

To sell, give or furnish any beer or light wine to any person visibly or noticeably intoxicated, or to any habitual drunkard, or to any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years.

To permit in the premises any lewd, immoral or improper entertainment, conduct or practices.

To permit loud, boisterous or disorderly conduct of any kind upon the premises or to permit the use of loud musical instruments if either or any of the same may disturb the peace and quietude of the community in which the business is located.

To permit persons of ill repute, known criminals, prostitutes or minors to frequent the licensed premises or the premises of the small craft brewery, except minors accompanied by parents or guardians, or under proper supervision.

To permit or suffer illegal gambling or the operation of illegal games of chance upon the licensed premises or the premises of the small craft brewery.

To receive, possess or sell on the licensed premises or, except as otherwise authorized by this chapter, on the premises of the small craft brewery any beverage of any kind or character containing more than five percent (5%) of alcohol by weight except any beer containing not more than eight percent (8%) of alcohol by weight, unless the licensee also possesses an on-premises or manufacturer’s permit under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law.

To accept as full or partial payment for any product any coupons that are redeemed directly or indirectly from a manufacturer, wholesaler or distributor of light wine or beer.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10223; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1944, ch. 133, §§ 2-4; Laws, 1974, ch. 568; Laws, 1985, ch. 431, § 1; Laws, 1991, ch. 368, § 3; Laws, 1995, ch. 398, § 1; Laws, 1998, ch. 306, § 10; Laws, 2008, ch. 442, § 19; Laws, 2012, ch. 323, § 11; Laws, 2012, ch. 369, § 1; Laws, 2017, ch. 345, § 5, eff from and after July 1, 2017.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 11 of Chapter 323, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 5, 2012), amended this section. Section 1 of Chapter 369, Laws of 2012, effective July 1, 2012 (approved April 17, 2012), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of both amendments, pursuant to Section 1-1-109 which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the August 16, 2012, meeting of the Committee.

Amendment Notes —

The 2008 amendment deleted “or to any insane person” following “noticeably intoxicated” in (b); and made minor stylistic changes.

The first 2012 amendment (ch. 323) inserted “except any beer containing not more than eight percent (8%) of alcohol by weight” following “of alcohol by weight” near the end of (g).

The second 2012 amendment (ch. 369), added (h).

The 2017 amendment, in the first paragraph, inserted “or a small craft brewerty…Section 67-3-48” and added “or the employee of such a brewery”; inserted “or in or upon the premises of a small craft brewery” in (a); inserted “or the premises of the small craft brewery” in (e) and (f); and in (g), inserted “or, except as otherwise authorized…small craft brewery” and “or manufacturer’s.”

Cross References —

Tax Commission’s regulatory powers, see §67-1-37.

Exemption for persons over age of 18 with parental consent, or who are military personnel, or who are employees of establishments licensed to sell light wine or beer, see §67-3-54.

Penalty for sale to underaged customer, see §67-3-69.

Penalties for purchase of light wine or beer by person under age of 21, see §67-3-70.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

2. Minors.

1. In general.

In an action arising from a motor vehicle accident caused by an intoxicated minor who allegedly smoked marijuana and drank beer purchased other than at the defendant restaurant, the defendant could be found liable if its negligence in selling beer consumed by the minor was a contributing case to the accident; it was not necessary that the defendant’s negligence be the sole proximate cause of the accident. Delahoussaye v. Mary Mahoney's, Inc., 783 So. 2d 666, 2001 Miss. LEXIS 39 (Miss. 2001).

In an action arising from a motor vehicle accident caused by a minor who alleged that he did not purchase beer from the defendant restaurant, judgment for the defendant restaurant was reversed based on inadequate jury instruction; the jury should have been instructed that it could find negligence per se if it found that the restaurant sold alcohol to another minor and that it could then hold the restaurant liable if it concluded that it was foreseeable that the minor to whom the alcohol was sold would share that alcohol with other minors. Delahoussaye v. Mary Mahoney's, Inc., 783 So. 2d 666, 2001 Miss. LEXIS 39 (Miss. 2001).

Genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether restaurant had illegally sold beer to minor who subsequently struck two other vehicles with truck, injuring motorist; thus, summary judgment for restaurant owner in motorist’s negligence action was precluded. Delahoussaye v. Mary Mahoney's, Inc., 696 So. 2d 689, 1997 Miss. LEXIS 103 (Miss. 1997).

Ordinance prohibiting commercial establishments from allowing consumption of alcoholic beverages between midnight and 7:00 a.m., which defined “consumption” to include possession in open containers as well as ingestion, was not preempted be statute expressly permitting possession of alcoholic beverages in “wet” municipalities absent clear expression of legislative intent to permit consumption, as opposed to mere possession, without limitation in wet areas, given broad grant of authority to municipalities to regulate impact of alcoholic beverages upon public health, morals, and safety and public policy favoring prevention of alcohol-related altercations and motor vehicle accidents, as limiting possession of opened containers was reasonable and necessary to enforce limitations on consumption. Maynard v. City of Tupelo, 691 So. 2d 385, 1997 Miss. LEXIS 94 (Miss. 1997).

Plaintiff, who had been injured in accident caused by drunk driver, and who had obtained default judgment against tavern that had allegedly violated §67-3-53 by providing beer to driver, could not collect judgment from tavern’s insurance company where insurance policy specifically excluded coverage for bodily injury resulting from violation of any statute or by reason of selling, serving, or giving any alcoholic beverage to person under influence of alcohol or that contributes to person becoming intoxicated. Williams v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 854 F.2d 106, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12170 (5th Cir. Miss. 1988).

Policy of liability insurance covering convenience store, which policy excluded coverage for bodily injury for which insured may be held liable by reason of selling, serving or giving of any alcoholic beverage to minor, excludes coverage for bodily injury by reason of selling, serving or giving of “beer”, even though definition of alcoholic beverage under state law excludes beer, as common and ordinary meaning of beer is beverage containing alcohol; liability policy which excluded coverage for bodily injury for which store was liable by reason of selling of alcoholic beverage to minor did not cover bodily injuries sustained in accident caused by underaged motorist’s intoxication from drinking beer which he bought at store, despite statute which excluded beer from definition of alcoholic beverages. Wilson ex rel. Wilson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Co., 659 F. Supp. 553, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13856 (S.D. Miss.), aff'd, 830 F.2d 588, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 14063 (5th Cir. Miss. 1987).

Sale of beer to minor in violation of statute constitutes negligence per se and trial court errs in refusing to grant such jury instruction. Bryant v. Alpha Entertainment Corp., 508 So. 2d 1094, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2584 (Miss. 1987).

Although Mississippi statutes relating to the sale of alcoholic beverages have sometimes been referred to as the Mississippi Dram Shop Law, such references are misleading because true dram shop acts are civil liability acts wherein the legislature specifically imposes liability on the seller of intoxicating liquors when a third party is injured as a result of the intoxication of the buyer where the sale caused or contributed to such intoxication. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

The statute which prohibits the sale of beer or wine to a minor was adopted for the protection of the general public and a minor is a member of the protected class. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

Society has a greater interest in protecting the welfare of minors than other groups listed in §§67-3-53(b),67-1-81 and67-1-83, because minors comprise a larger segment of society than do the others listed, and the future of society is dependent upon the welfare and protection of its youth. Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346, 1986 Miss. LEXIS 2755 (Miss. 1986).

In a wrongful death action alleging that defendant market was negligent in selling beer to a minor who was subsequently killed in an automobile accident, the trial court did not err in overruling defendant’s demurrer where the complaint alleged a violation of the statute prohibiting the sale of beer to minors and that such negligence had contributed to the car wreck and decedent’s death; although such statute was enacted for the legalization and regulation of the manufacture and sale of beer and wine, it was also adopted for the protection of the general public. Munford, Inc. v. Peterson, 368 So. 2d 213, 1979 Miss. LEXIS 2227 (Miss. 1979).

An indictment charging the holder of a permit for the sale of beer and wine at retail with selling, giving or furnishing beer to a person under 18 years of age, was not defective in failing to charge the defendant with knowledge that his employee sold or gave beer to the minor, since the defendant’s lack of knowledge of the acts of his employee was a defense and a question of fact for submission to the jury, and neither matters of evidence nor matters of defense need be averred in an indictment or information. State v. Labella, 232 So. 2d 354, 1970 Miss. LEXIS 1620 (Miss. 1970).

An indictment under the wording of the statute making it unlawful for the holder of a permit for the sale of beer or wine at retail to sell, give or furnish any beer or wine to a person under the age of 18 years, was not defective for failing to charge the defendant with knowing that his employee sold or gave beer to a minor, where the statute itself does not use the word “knowing” and where the indictment was based upon an affidavit so worded as to show that the defendant knew of his employee’s activities in selling beer to a minor. State v. Labella, 232 So. 2d 354, 1970 Miss. LEXIS 1620 (Miss. 1970).

Subsection (a) of this section, when read in conjunction with Code 1942, § 10224, as a whole, and one section in context with the other, merely makes for the conclusion that though Code 1942, § 10224 refers to the authority of municipalities to prescribe hours opening or closing of businesses selling light wines and beer, those hours prescribed by the municipality must come within the limits of the hours established by state law. Watkins v. Navarrette, 227 So. 2d 853, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1375 (Miss. 1969).

Subsection (a) of this section means that municipalities have the authority to regulate the hours in which beer can be sold within the hours of 7:00 a.m. to midnight, and a municipal ordinance extending the hours in which beer can be sold beyond midnight and before 7:00 a.m. the following morning would be in conflict with this subparagraph; and it is well established that any conflict between an ordinance and a statute, the latter must prevail. Watkins v. Navarrette, 227 So. 2d 853, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1375 (Miss. 1969).

A charge under this section is supported by a finding of guilty of any one of the elements specified. Ellard v. State, 248 Miss. 313, 158 So. 2d 690, 1963 Miss. LEXIS 396 (Miss. 1963).

2. Minors.

When a reasonable inference from the evidence is that a person exhibiting identification that he or she was an adult ordered drinks for minors to be consumed on a bar’s premises, this inference is sufficient to create a fact question on the issue of the bar’s tort liability under Miss. Code Ann. §67-3-53(b). Moore v. K&J Enters., 856 So. 2d 621, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 594 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. dismissed, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 198 (Miss. Feb. 12, 2004).

In a suit against a bar for furnishing alcohol to a minor who later caused an auto accident, the trial court properly excluded evidence of prior sales of alcohol to minors by the bar, as there was no purpose for such evidence other than to show that the bar had a propensity to sell alcohol to minors. Moore v. K&J Enters., 856 So. 2d 621, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 594 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. dismissed, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 198 (Miss. Feb. 12, 2004).

In a suit against a bar for furnishing alcohol to a minor who later caused an auto accident, the trial court erred by directing a verdict for the bar, as the evidence created a fact question as to whether the bar knew or should have known that the buyer of drinks (who presented a false Mississippi driver’s license showing he was 21) was giving them to minors. Moore v. K&J Enters., 856 So. 2d 621, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 594 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. dismissed, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 198 (Miss. Feb. 12, 2004).

A municipal ordinance which made it a misdemeanor for any permit holder to allow persons under 21 years of age to enter on-premises retailers even if such persons were accompanied by parents, guardians, or under proper supervision was properly adopted under §67-3-65 and was not invalid on the basis of its conflict with §67-3-53. Collins v. City of Hazlehurst, 709 So. 2d 408, 1997 Miss. LEXIS 751 (Miss. 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 904, 118 S. Ct. 2061, 141 L. Ed. 2d 138, 1998 U.S. LEXIS 3592 (U.S. 1998).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Section 67-3-53(a) provides that a holder of a permit for the sale of beer and light wine may not sell or give to be consumed in or upon any licensed premises beer or light wine between the hours of midnight and seven o’clock the following morning. The statute applies only to businesses where beer or light wine is sold or given to be consumed in or upon the premises and does not apply to businesses where beer and light wine are sold for off premises consumption, such as grocery stores and convenience stores with permits for the sale of beer and light wine. Baker, November 1, 1996, A.G. Op. #96-0737.

An ordinance regulating the hours of sale of beer and light wines falls within the authority of a municipality to regulate hours of opening and closing pursuant to §67-3-65; however, any specific hours prescribed by the municipality for the sale of such beverages must come within the limits of this section. Tyner, March 5, 1999, A.G. Op. #99-0074.

Section 67-3-53(a) allows the on-premises sale of beer and light wine beyond midnight by anyone who has a permit to sell beer or light wine in areas where the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division (ABC) of the State Tax Commission has extended the hours of on-premises sale for alcoholic beverages beyond midnight. Parker, May 12, 2003, A.G. Op. 03-0219.

Because, based on the language of Section 67-3-53, the Legislature has shown a clear intent to allow the on-premises sale of beer and light wine beyond midnight in areas where the on-premises sale of alcoholic beverages have been extended beyond midnight, therefore, the Legislature has preempted this area with a specific statute that would make any local ordinance to the contrary void. Parker, May 12, 2003, A.G. Op. 03-0219.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Criminal offense of selling liquor to a minor or permitting him to stay on licensed premises as affected by ignorance or mistake regarding his age. 12 A.L.R.3d 991.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 226 et seq.

45 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 2d 631, Age of Person.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 376 et seq.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-3-54. Exemption for person over age 18 but less than 21; parental consent; military personnel; employee of establishment licensed to sell light wine or beer.

  1. A person who is at least eighteen (18) years of age but under the age of twenty-one (21) years may possess and consume light wine or beer with the consent of his parent or legal guardian in the presence of his parent or legal guardian, and it shall not be unlawful for the parent, legal guardian or spouse of such person to furnish light wine or beer to such person who is at least eighteen (18) years of age.
  2. A person who is at least eighteen (18) years of age and who is serving in the armed services of the United States may lawfully possess and consume light wine or beer on military property where the consumption of light wine or beer is allowed.
  3. A person who is under twenty-one (21) years of age shall not be deemed to unlawfully possess or furnish light wine or beer, if in the scope of his employment such person:
    1. Clears or buses tables that have glasses or other containers that contain or did contain light wine or beer;
    2. Waits on tables by taking orders for light wine or beer; or
    3. Stocks, bags or otherwise handles purchases of light wine or beer at a store.

HISTORY: Laws, 1985, ch. 431, § 4, eff from and after October 1, 1986.

Cross References —

Sale to underaged customer, see §67-3-53.

Penalty for sales to underaged customers, see §67-3-69.

Penalties for purchase of light wine or beer by person under age of 21, see §67-3-70.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Criminal offense of selling liquor to a minor or permitting him to stay on licensed premises as affected by ignorance or mistake regarding his age. 12 A.L.R.3d 991.

Serving liquor to minor in home as unlawful sale or gift. 14 A.L.R.3d 1186.

What constitutes “sale” of liquor in violation of statute or ordinance. 89 A.L.R.3d 551.

What constitutes violation of enactment prohibiting sale of intoxicating liquor to minor. 89 A.L.R.3d 1256.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 220 et seq.

1 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 315, Age.

CJS.

48 C.J.S. Intoxicating Liquor §§ 345-350, 460.

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-3-55. Possession or sale of light wine or beer not purchased from licensed or authorized manufacturer or wholesaler prohibited; brewpub exemption; breweries providing beer on premises for tasting or sampling exemption.

  1. It shall be unlawful for any retailer to possess for purpose of sale, to sell, or to offer to sell any light wine or beer which was not purchased from a wholesaler in this state who has a permit to sell such light wine or beer, except for beer or light wine that was brewed on the premises of the retailer who holds a permit as a brewpub pursuant to Article 3, Chapter 71, Title 27, Mississippi Code of 1972.
  2. It shall be unlawful for any wholesaler to possess for purpose of sale, to sell, or to offer to sell any light wine or beer which was not purchased from a manufacturer or importer of a foreign manufacturer authorized to sell such light wine or beer in this state.
  3. This section shall not apply to:
    1. Beer offered and provided on the premises of a brewery for the purpose of tasting or sampling as authorized in Section 67-3-47; or
    2. Light wine or beer sold on the premises of a small craft brewery as authorized in Section 67-3-48.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10246; Laws, 1934, ch. 127; Laws, 1973, ch. 467, § 1; Laws, 1978, ch. 381, § 1; Laws, 1980, ch. 342, § 2; Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 12; Laws, 2012, ch. 569, § 3; Laws, 2017, ch. 345, § 6, eff from and after July 1, 2017.

Amendment Notes —

The 2012 amendment added (3).

The 2017 amendment added (3)(b).

Cross References —

Licenses for manufacturer, wholesaler, or distributor of light wine or beer, see §§67-3-27 et seq.

Penalty for violation, see §67-3-69.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Where evidence showed that defendant had in his possession cases of beer on which the state tax had not been paid or stamps affixed, and that the defendant intended to take the beer to a certain picnic but not for his own consumption, this could not warrant conviction of defendant under Code 1942, § 10233 which forbids wholesaler, distributor or retailer of beverages to have in his possession wine or beer manufactured or sold by manufacturer not complying with statutory requirements pertaining to sale and taxation of wine and beer. Mills v. State, 219 Miss. 194, 68 So. 2d 278, 1953 Miss. LEXIS 381 (Miss. 1953).

In prosecution for possession of quantity of unpacked malt liquor, where evidence was not sufficient to sustain conviction for the offense, but might have been sufficient to sustain conviction for violation of other statutes relating to malt liquor, the judgment would be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings. Mills v. State, 219 Miss. 194, 68 So. 2d 278, 1953 Miss. LEXIS 381 (Miss. 1953).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Admissibility, in prosecution for illegal sale of intoxicating liquor, of other sales. 40 A.L.R.2d 817.

§ 67-3-57. Possession or sale of light wine or beer before permit secured or during time of revocation or suspension prohibited; seizure of light wine or beer for violation of section.

  1. It shall be unlawful for any retailer to possess, sell or offer to sell, or to possess for purpose of sale, any light wine or beer at his place of business before securing a permit required by this chapter.
  2. It shall be unlawful for any person to possess, sell or offer to sell any light wine or beer at his place of business after revocation of his permit or to purchase, to sell or offer to sell any light wine or beer during the period of suspension of his permit.
  3. Any light wine or beer found in possession of, or sold by, a person in violation of this section shall be seized and disposed of in the manner provided for in Section 67-1-18.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10246; Laws, 1934, ch. 127; Laws, 1973, ch. 467, § 1; Laws, 1986, ch. 337, § 8; Laws, 1997, ch. 499, § 11; Laws, 2000, ch. 435, § 10; Laws, 2015, ch. 438, § 6, eff from and after passage (approved Apr. 13, 2015).

Amendment Notes —

The 2015 amendment inserted subsection designations and added (3).

Cross References —

Penalties for violation of stamp tax regulations, see §§27-71-331 et seq.

Penalty for violation, see §67-3-69.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Where evidence showed that defendant had in his possession cases of beer on which the state tax had not been paid or stamps affixed, and that the defendant intended to take the beer to a certain picnic but not for his own consumption, this could not warrant conviction of defendant under Code 1942, § 10233 which forbids wholesaler, distributor or retailer of beverages to have in his possession wine or beer manufactured or sold by manufacturer not complying with statutory requirements pertaining to sale and taxation of wine and beer. Mills v. State, 219 Miss. 194, 68 So. 2d 278, 1953 Miss. LEXIS 381 (Miss. 1953).

In prosecution for possession of quantity of unpacked malt liquor, where evidence was not sufficient to sustain conviction for the offense, but might have been sufficient to sustain conviction for violation of other statutes relating to malt liquor, the judgment would be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings. Mills v. State, 219 Miss. 194, 68 So. 2d 278, 1953 Miss. LEXIS 381 (Miss. 1953).

§ 67-3-59. Penalty for sales to persons not holding permits and sales of untaxed wine or beer; notice; disposition of proceeds.

  1. Except as provided in this subsection, sales by wholesalers, distributors or manufacturers to persons who do not hold valid permits are unlawful; and any wholesaler, distributor or manufacturer making such sales, or who sells any beer or light wine on which the tax provided by law has not been paid, shall, in addition to any other fines, penalties and forfeitures, be subject to a penalty of Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00) for each sale. If all other applicable taxes are paid, this penalty will not apply to the following: sales to employees of the wholesaler; sales to nonprofit charitable and civic organizations for special fund-raising events provided that the beer or light wine is not resold; sales to affiliated member associations.
  2. The commissioner may assess the penalty by giving notice by mail, demanding payment within thirty (30) days from date of delivery of the notice.

    The proceeds of all penalties shall be deposited by the commissioner with the other monies collected by him and shall be disposed of as provided by law.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10217; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1978, ch. 386, § 1; Laws, 1991, ch. 368, § 4; Laws, 2005, ch. 499, § 32, eff from and after July 1, 2005.

Amendment Notes —

The 2005 amendment designated the formerly undesignated provisions as (1) and (2); substituted “Except as provided in this subsection” for “Except as hereinafter provided in this paragraph” in the first sentence of (1); rewrote (2); and made minor stylistic changes throughout.

§ 67-3-61. Common carriers shall furnish commissioner with duplicate bills of lading; penalty.

Every railroad company, express company, aeroplane company, motor transportation company, steamboat company, or other transportation company, or any person that shall transport into, from place to place within, or out of this state any light wines or beer, whether brewed or manufactured within this state or outside of this state, when requested by the commissioner, shall furnish him with a duplicate of the bill of lading covering the receipt for such liquor, showing the name of the brewer or manufacturer or distributor, and the name and address of the consignor and of the consignee, and the date when and place where received, and the destination and the quantity of such liquor received from the manufacturer or brewer or other consignor for shipment from any point within or without this state to any point within this state.

Any such company or person so transporting any such liquor that shall fail to comply with the requirements of this section, shall forfeit and pay to the State of Mississippi the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for each such failure, to be recovered in any court of competent jurisdiction. The commissioner is hereby authorized and empowered to sue in his own name, on the relation and for the use of the State of Mississippi, for such recovery.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10218; Laws, 1934, ch. 171.

Cross References —

Reports by common carriers to Public Service Commission, see §77-7-261.

Rule making it unlawful to transport intoxicating liquors into or within state, see §97-31-47.

Trial of common carrier for violation of intoxicating liquor regulations, see §§99-27-27 et seq.

§ 67-3-63. Records.

The commissioner shall cause a record to be kept of the names and places of business of all persons engaged in the brewing of beer, of all persons engaged in the manufacture of light wines, and of all persons engaged in the sale of light wines and/or beer, whether at retail or otherwise. He shall also cause a record to be kept of all beer and light wines (and of the amount thereof) brewed or manufactured by each brewery or winery, and of all such liquors (and of the amount thereof) sold by each brewery or winery, with the names and business addresses of the purchasers, and of all such liquors (and of the amount thereof) sold by every dealer other than a brewer or manufacturer, and in the case of sales by dealers other than retail dealers, of the names and business addresses of the purchasers.

The commissioner shall cause a record to be kept of all expenses incurred in the collection of such data.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10221; Laws, 1934, ch. 171.

Cross References —

List of dealers to be kept by breweries, see §27-71-501.

§ 67-3-65. Powers of local governments.

Municipalities may enforce such proper rules and regulations for fixing zones and territories, prescribing hours of opening and of closing, and for such other measures as will promote public health, morals, and safety, as they may by ordinance provide. The board of supervisors of any county may make such rules and regulations as to territory outside of municipalities as are herein provided for municipalities.

Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit the governing body of any municipality from designating what territory surrounding churches and schools in said municipalities, and the board of supervisors of any county from designating what territory surrounding churches and schools outside of any municipality, in which light wines and beer shall not be sold or consumed.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10224, 10228; Laws, 1934, ch. 171.

Cross References —

Standard state zoning law, see §17-1-3.

Municipal option election to permit the sale of beer, see §67-3-9.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Construction.

2. Powers of local governments.

3. Actions of local governments.

4. Appeals.

5. Miscellaneous.

1. Construction.

Code 1942, § 10223(a), when read in conjunction with Code 1942, § 10224, as a whole, and one section in context with the other, merely makes for the conclusion that though Code 1942, § 10224 refers to the authority of municipalities to prescribe hours opening or closing of businesses selling light wines and beer, those hours prescribed by the municipality must come within the limits of the hours established by state law. Watkins v. Navarrette, 227 So. 2d 853, 1969 Miss. LEXIS 1375 (Miss. 1969).

A licensee has no vested property right in a license to sell beer and light wines, which is simply a revocable permit or alienable privilege, with reference to a business which has long been recognized as peculiarly affecting the public interest and subject to governmental regulations. Miller v. Board of Supervisors, 230 Miss. 849, 94 So. 2d 604, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 431 (Miss. 1957).

Provision of statute relating to regulation of sale of wine and beer by municipalities and boards of supervisors outside of municipalities that nothing in statute shall prohibit the designation of the territory surrounding churches and schools in which such beverages shall not be sold or consumed, did not limit power to prohibit to territory surrounding churches and schools. Alexander v. Graves, 178 Miss. 583, 173 So. 417, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 221 (Miss. 1937).

Statute relating to sale of wine and beer which provided that municipalities and boards of supervisors of territory lying outside of municipalities may enforce regulations “for fixing zones and territories” and for prescribing hours of opening and closing and such other measures as will promote public health, morals, and safety held to confer upon municipalities and on boards of supervisors in such territory the power to fix zones in which sale might be conducted and other zones in which sale might be prohibited, “zone” connoting within itself a fixed territory. Alexander v. Graves, 178 Miss. 583, 173 So. 417, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 221 (Miss. 1937).

Powers conferred on municipalities and boards of supervisors of territory lying outside municipalities with regard to regulating sale of wine and beer must be based on reasonable conditions, that is, some basis of fact ascertained by board of supervisors which would have a material bearing on whether sale should be by a resident of the state for a period of two years. Alexander v. Graves, 178 Miss. 583, 173 So. 417, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 221 (Miss. 1937).

2. Powers of local governments.

A municipal ordinance which made it a misdemeanor for any permit holder to allow persons under 21 years of age to enter on-premises retailers even if such persons were accompanied by parents, guardians, or under proper supervision was properly adopted under §67-3-65 and was not invalid on the basis of its conflict with §67-3-53. Collins v. City of Hazlehurst, 709 So. 2d 408, 1997 Miss. LEXIS 751 (Miss. 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 904, 118 S. Ct. 2061, 141 L. Ed. 2d 138, 1998 U.S. LEXIS 3592 (U.S. 1998).

Pursuant to §67-3-65, a city was authorized to enact ordinances regulating light wine and beer on adult entertainment premises without showing any secondary effects or showing that such establishments were conducive to criminal behavior; accordingly, any artistic or communicative value that might attach to topless dancing was overridden by the city’s exercise of its broad powers arising under the Twenty-First Amendment, and the city’s prohibition of light wine and beer in a lounge featuring topless dancing was constitutionally permissible. Steverson v. City of Vicksburg, 900 F. Supp. 1, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20777 (S.D. Miss. 1994).

Conditions arising largely from the coming into the county to purchase wine and beer, of persons from other counties in which such sale was not permitted, warrant the zoning against such sale of a half mile strip bordering such other counties. Herbert v. Board of Supervisors, 241 Miss. 223, 130 So. 2d 250, 1961 Miss. LEXIS 335 (Miss. 1961).

Notice and hearing are not required before the making of a zoning order. Herbert v. Board of Supervisors, 241 Miss. 223, 130 So. 2d 250, 1961 Miss. LEXIS 335 (Miss. 1961).

It was not necessary for the board of supervisors to give notice and have a hearing prior to the making of an order prohibiting the sale of beer and light wines in a described area of two heavily populated unincorporated communities, which were without adequate police protection. Miller v. Board of Supervisors, 230 Miss. 849, 94 So. 2d 604, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 431 (Miss. 1957).

This section and Code 1942, § 10228, vest in board of supervisors a wide discretion in determining the reasonableness of an order prohibiting or restricting the sale of beer within a named territory. Miller v. Board of Supervisors, 230 Miss. 849, 94 So. 2d 604, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 431 (Miss. 1957).

Order of board of supervisors prohibiting sale of beer or wine between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. and all day on Sunday, outside of the municipalities of county, passed without petition therefor and without hearing or notice to interested parties, is within the power of the board and does not violate any constitutional right of any of the complaining parties, since order does not prohibit places from being open for any other lawful purpose. Board of Sup'rs v. McCormick, 207 Miss. 216, 42 So. 2d 177, 1949 Miss. LEXIS 331 (Miss. 1949).

3. Actions of local governments.

Zoning ordinance prohibiting sale of beer within 500 feet of public school constitutes valid and reasonable exercise of police power of city because only minimal showing of rationality is necessary to enable liquor zoning ordinance to withstand constitutional attack. Davidson v. Clinton, 826 F.2d 1430, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 12259 (5th Cir. Miss. 1987).

Defendant was properly enjoined from engaging in the sale of beer in violation of an order of the board of supervisors zoning a certain area of the county against the sale of beer, notwithstanding his contention that the board’s order, having been adopted and entered without notice and without a hearing to the complaining parties, was invalid and beyond the power of the board, and that there was no proof to justify the issuance of the injunction against the defendant. Pace v. State, 231 Miss. 144, 94 So. 2d 798, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 497 (Miss. 1957).

An order of the board of supervisors made without any public hearing or notice, prohibiting the sale of beer and light wines within a described area of two heavily populated, unincorporated communities, which were without adequate police protection, and located only a few miles from a city, after being advised by the sheriff that such action was necessary in interest of adequate law enforcement, was not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Miller v. Board of Supervisors, 230 Miss. 849, 94 So. 2d 604, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 431 (Miss. 1957).

An order of a board of supervisors prohibiting the sale of light beer and wine from an entire school district in which there had been no election on the question, where it was shown that the place of business of the only authorized beer dealer in the district was one-half mile from the nearest residence and one and one-half miles from the school and the nearest church, and that school children did not pass the place going to or from schools, was unreasonable, and was beyond the power of the board. Green v. Alcorn County, 192 Miss. 468, 6 So. 2d 130, 1942 Miss. LEXIS 27 (Miss. 1942).

Where a board of supervisors adopted an order prohibiting the sale of light beer and wine from an entire school district, rather than an order based upon reasonable grounds prohibiting such sale merely within a limited area adjacent to a church or school, specifying the distance, the order was reversed. Green v. Alcorn County, 192 Miss. 468, 6 So. 2d 130, 1942 Miss. LEXIS 27 (Miss. 1942).

An order by the board of county supervisors, issued pursuant to the powers conferred by this section, prohibiting the sale of beer and wine within fifteen hundred feet of any school or church in certain territory in an unincorporated village containing two hundred and four inhabitants, was reasonable. Ford v. Easterling, 183 Miss. 575, 184 So. 153, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 271 (Miss. 1938).

Finding of board of supervisors that property within zone in which sale of wine and beer was prohibited was a residential section and that it would promote public health, morals, and safety to have sale prohibited within such territory was binding on reviewing court where petition for prohibition to restrain enforcement of ordinance did not set forth specific facts but merely general conclusions. Alexander v. Graves, 178 Miss. 583, 173 So. 417, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 221 (Miss. 1937).

4. Appeals.

Since the passage of an order prohibiting the sale of beer prescribing the areas within which it might be sold is a legislative action of the board of supervisors under powers delegated to it by statute, on appeal therefrom the question is whether the board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, or is arbitrary or capricious, or beyond the power of the board to make, or whether it violates any constitutional right of the complaining party. Miller v. Board of Supervisors, 230 Miss. 849, 94 So. 2d 604, 1957 Miss. LEXIS 431 (Miss. 1957).

Board of supervisors in enforcing rules and regulations for prescribing hours of opening and closing under the provisions of this section exercises a legislative and not a judicial power but appeals from their decisions are nonetheless within the contemplation of Code 1942, § 1195. Board of Sup'rs v. McCormick, 207 Miss. 216, 42 So. 2d 177, 1949 Miss. LEXIS 331 (Miss. 1949).

Writ of prohibition to restrain board of supervisors and sheriff from enforcing against petitioners order of board forbidding sale of beer during certain hours, adopted pursuant to this section, was properly denied, since the writ was not sought to restrain either the board or the sheriff from any judicial action. Holmes v. Board of Supervisors, 199 Miss. 363, 24 So. 2d 867, 1946 Miss. LEXIS 204 (Miss. 1946).

While it is true that the courts will not interfere with boards of supervisors in the lawful exercise of the jurisdiction committed to them by law on the sole grounds that their actions are characterized by lack of wisdom or sound discretion, it is the duty of the court to review an order prohibiting the sale of light beer and wine from an entire school district for the purpose of determining whether it has any substantial support under the facts disclosed as a reasonable exercise of the powers delegated to the boards by the legislature. Green v. Alcorn County, 192 Miss. 468, 6 So. 2d 130, 1942 Miss. LEXIS 27 (Miss. 1942).

Walters v. Board of Supervisors, 184 So. 160 (Miss. 1938).

5. Miscellaneous.

Licensed person selling beer held not entitled to restrain enforcement of ordinance adopted by board of supervisors finding the district in which such person sold beer was a residential district and prohibiting sale of beer therein. Alexander v. Graves, 178 Miss. 583, 173 So. 417, 1937 Miss. LEXIS 221 (Miss. 1937).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Determination of boundaries of territories in which the sale of beer will be prohibited in the vicinity of schools and churches lies within the discretion of governing authorities, as long as the ordinances are reasonable under statute. Younger, Feb. 5, 1992, A.G. Op. #92-0008.

County Board of Supervisors may by ordinance prohibit consumption of alcoholic beverages, beer and wine on property owned by United States in county and on which concurrent jurisdiction has been reserved to state or granted by United States. Gore Oct. 6, 1993, A.G. Op. #93-0730.

A local “open container” ordinance prohibiting the possession of open containers of beer or light wine while operating a motor vehicle would be allowed by section 67-3-65. Bradley, September 13, 1995, A.G. Op. #95-0585.

An ordinance prohibiting or regulating the sale of beer and light wines on Sundays falls within the authority of a municipality to regulate hours of opening and closing pursuant to the statute; further, an ordinance which could be reasonably interpreted to provide hours on Sunday within which establishments holding permits for the sale of beer are “closed” for the sale of beer and light wines but open for other lawful purposes would also be allowed. Stark, August 28, 1998, A.G. Op. #98-0484.

An ordinance regulating the hours of sale of beer and light wines falls within the authority of a municipality to regulate hours of opening and closing pursuant to this section; however, any specific hours prescribed by the municipality for the sale of such beverages must come within the limits of §67-3-53. Tyner, March 5, 1999, A.G. Op. #99-0074.

An ordinance regulating or prohibiting the possession of open containers of beer or light wine by an individual while operating or riding in a motor vehicle, or while on public property, including municipally-owned buildings or property, would be within the authority of a municipality. Phillips, July 2, 1999, A.G. Op. #99-0264.

A municipal ordinance may regulate or prohibit the possession of unopened containers of beer and wine within city parks, auditoriums or coliseums. Phillips, July 2, 1999, A.G. Op. #99-0264.

A municipal ordinance may not prohibit the possession of lawfully purchased beer or light wine by an individual on private property. Phillips, July 2, 1999, A.G. Op. #99-0264.

Whether adoption of an ordinance limiting sales of beer and light wines for on-premises consumption to establishments that serve a certain ratio of meals is a valid exercise of the municipality’s power under Section 67-3-65 is a determination for a court of competent jurisdiction. Kirk, Nov. 8, 2002, A.G. Op. #02-0644.

A county board of supervisors may place the issue of Sunday sales of beer and light wines before the electorate by means of a non-binding referendum. Hemphill, Apr. 4, 2003, A.G. Op. 03-0061.

Even though a business selling alcohol located inside a municipality is within the proscribed distance from a church as set out in a county ordinance, the ordinance is not enforceable against such business. Howard, Feb. 17, 2006, A.G. Op. 06-0039.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 18.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 52 et seq.

§ 67-3-67. Transportation of light wines and beer not to be interfered with.

No county or any officer or agent thereof, nor any other officer, agent, or person, shall interfere with or impede the passage through such county of any light wine or beer moving in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of Section 67-9-1 and which in transit to or from any county of this state wherein the traffic in light wines and beer is not prohibited, any county prohibition of such traffic to the contrary notwithstanding.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, § 10225; Laws, 1934, ch. 171; Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 12, eff from and after July 1, 1996.

Cross References —

Rule making it unlawful to transport beer on which the tax has not been paid, see §27-71-317.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Although replevin was not the proper action to secure possession from the sheriff of a truckload of beer confiscated while being transported through a “dry” county, where the plaintiff’s declaration filed in the action was in sufficient detail to constitute a claim for the beer, he was entitled to a hearing on the merits. Miss. State Highway Com. v. Ulmer, 186 So. 2d 460, 1966 Miss. LEXIS 1309 (Miss. 1966).

§ 67-3-69. Penalty.

  1. Except as to Sections 67-3-17, 67-3-23, 67-3-27, 67-3-55 and 67-3-57, any violation of any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation of the commissioner, shall be a misdemeanor and, where the punishment therefor is not elsewhere prescribed in this section, shall be punished by a fine of not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or both, in the discretion of the court. If any person so convicted shall be the holder of any permit or license issued by the commissioner under authority of this chapter, the permit or license shall from and after the date of such conviction be void and the holder thereof shall not thereafter, for a period of one (1) year from the date of such conviction, be entitled to any permit or license for any purpose authorized by this chapter. Upon conviction of the holder of any permit or license, the appropriate law enforcement officer shall seize the permit or license and transmit it to the commissioner.
    1. Any person who shall violate any provision of Section 67-3-17, 67-3-23, 67-3-27 or 67-3-55 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.
    2. Any person who shall violate any provision of Section 67-3-57 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one (1) year, or by both, in the discretion of the court. Any person convicted of violating any provision of the sections referred to in this subsection shall forfeit his permit, and shall not thereafter be permitted to engage in any business taxable under the provisions of Sections 27-71-301 through 27-71-347.
  2. If the holder of a permit, or the employee of the holder of a permit, shall be convicted of selling any beer or wine to anyone who is visibly intoxicated from the licensed premises or to any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years from the licensed premises in violation of Section 67-3-53(b), then, in addition to any other penalty provided for by law, the commissioner may impose the following penalties against the holder of a permit:
    1. For the first offense on the licensed premises, by a fine of not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) nor more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) and/or suspension of the permit for not more than three (3) months.
    2. For a second offense occurring on the licensed premises within twelve (12) months of the first offense, by a fine of not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) nor more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) and/or suspension of the permit for not more than six (6) months.
    3. For a third offense occurring on the licensed premises within twelve (12) months of the first, by a fine of not less than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) and/or suspension or revocation of the permit to sell beer or light wine.
    4. For a fourth or subsequent offense occurring on the licensed premises within twelve (12) months of the first, by a fine of not less than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) and/or suspension or revocation of the permit to sell beer or light wine.
  3. A person who sells any beer or wine to a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years shall not be guilty of a violation of Section 67-3-53(b) if the person under the age of twenty-one (21) years represents himself to be twenty-one (21) years of age or older by displaying an apparently valid Mississippi driver’s license containing a physical description consistent with his appearance or by displaying some other apparently valid identification document containing a picture and physical description consistent with his appearance for the purpose of inducing the person to sell beer or wine to him.
  4. If the holder of a permit to operate a brewpub is convicted of violating the provisions of Section 67-3-22(3), then, in addition to any other provision provided for by law, the holder of the permit shall be punished as follows:
    1. For the first offense, the holder of a permit to operate a brewpub may be fined in an amount not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00).
    2. For a second offense occurring within twelve (12) months of the first offense, the holder of a permit to operate a brewpub may be fined an amount not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00).
    3. For a third or subsequent offense occurring within twelve (12) months of the first offense, the holder of a permit to operate a brewpub may be fined an amount not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) and the permit to operate a brewpub shall be suspended for thirty (30) days.
  5. If a small craft brewery is convicted of violating the provisions of Section 67-3-48, then, in addition to any other provision provided for by law, the small craft brewery shall be punished as follows:
    1. For the first offense, the small craft brewery may be fined in an amount not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00).
    2. For a second offense occurring within twelve (12) months of the first offense, the small craft brewery may be fined an amount not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00).
    3. For a third or subsequent offense occurring within twelve (12) months of the first offense, the small craft brewery may be fined an amount not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) and the permit to operate as a manufacturer shall be suspended for thirty (30) days.

HISTORY: Codes, 1942, §§ 10226, 10264; Laws, 1934, chs. 127, 171; Laws, 1985, ch 431, § 2; Laws, 1997, ch. 499, § 12; Laws, 1998, ch. 308, § 13; Laws, 2000, ch. 435, § 11; Laws, 2005, ch. 462, § 5; Laws, 2017, ch. 345, § 7, eff from and after July 1, 2017.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Pursuant to Section 1-1-109, the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision and Publication of Legislation corrected a statutory reference in (5). The reference to “Section 14(3) of Senate Bill No. 2826, 1998 Regular Session” was changed to “Section 67-3-22(3)”. The Joint Committee ratified the correction at its April 28, 1999 meeting.

Amendment Notes —

The 2005 amendment, in (1), inserted “in this section” following “not elsewhere prescribed” in the first sentence, and made a minor stylistic change in the second sentence; and rewrote (3).

The 2017 amendment added (6).

Cross References —

Taxation of light wines and beer, see §§27-71-301 et seq.

License applicant’s oath not to violate alcohol control laws, see §67-3-17.

Issuance, transfer and display of permits, see §67-3-23.

Application for license, see §67-3-27.

Sale to under-age customer, see §67-3-53.

Exemption for persons over age of 18 with parental consent, or who are military personnel, or who are employees of establishments licensed to sell light wine or beer, see §67-3-54.

Possession for sale of light wine or beer not acquired from licensed wholesaler or distributor, see §67-3-55.

Possession or sale of untaxed light wine or beer, see §67-3-57.

Penalties for purchase of light wine or beer by person under age of 21, see §67-3-70.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

In a suit against a bar for furnishing alcohol to a minor who later caused an auto accident, the trial court erred by directing a verdict for the bar, as the evidence created a fact question as to whether the bar knew or should have known that the buyer of drinks (who presented a false Mississippi driver’s license showing he was 21) was giving them to minors. Moore v. K&J Enters., 856 So. 2d 621, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 594 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. dismissed, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 198 (Miss. Feb. 12, 2004).

Where a statute making it unlawful to sell beer was repealed by statute which authorized sale within the state and permitted counties to prohibit such sales, and where a majority of qualified electors in county determined that the sale of beer should not be permitted within the county, such a sale of beer thereafter was prohibited and punishable as violation of chapter relating to wine and beer. Hays v. State, 219 Miss. 808, 69 So. 2d 845, 1954 Miss. LEXIS 389 (Miss. 1954).

In beer election case, if judgment is affirmed, all offenses against law during time appeal was pending are punishable as if no appeal had been taken, regardless of supersedeas. Early v. Board of Supervisors, 182 Miss. 636, 181 So. 132, 1938 Miss. LEXIS 163 (Miss. 1938).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

1A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Administrative Law, Form 341.2 (complaint, petition, or declaration – by license holder – against administrative agency – to enjoin further proceedings to suspend or revoke license – attempt to suspend or revoke license on grounds not listed in statute authorizing suspension or revocation of license).

Law Reviews.

Commercial alcohol vendor liability in Mississippi: Is the party over? 59 Miss. L. J. 209, Spring, 1989.

§ 67-3-70. Purchase of light wine or beer by person under age of 21; penalties; expungement of conviction.

  1. Except as otherwise provided by Section 67-3-54, any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years who purchases or possesses any light wine or beer shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not less than Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) and a sentence to not more than thirty (30) days community service.
  2. Any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years who falsely states he is twenty-one (21) years of age or older or presents any document that indicates he is twenty-one (21) years of age or older for the purpose of purchasing or possessing any light wine or beer shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not less than Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) and a sentence to not more than thirty (30) days community service.
  3. Except as otherwise provided by Section 67-3-54, any person who knowingly purchases light wine or beer for, or gives light wine or beer to a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not less than Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) and a sentence to not more than thirty (30) days community service. The punishment provided under this subsection shall not be applicable to violations of Section 97-5-49.
  4. The term “community service” as used in this section shall mean work, projects or services for the benefit of the community assigned, supervised and recorded by appropriate public officials.
  5. If a person under the age of twenty-one (21) years is convicted or enters a plea of guilty of violating subsection (1) or subsection (2) of this section, the trial judge, in lieu of the penalties otherwise provided under this section, shall suspend the minor’s driver’s license by taking and keeping it in the custody of the court for a period of time not to exceed ninety (90) days. The judge so ordering the suspension shall enter upon his docket “DEFENDANT’S DRIVER’S LICENSE SUSPENDED FOR_______________DAYS IN LIEU OF CONVICTION” and such action by the trial judge shall not constitute a conviction. During the period that the minor’s driver’s license is suspended, the trial judge shall suspend the imposition of any fines or penalties that may be imposed under this section and may place the minor on probation subject to such conditions as the judge deems appropriate. If the minor violates any of the conditions of probation, then the trial judge shall return the driver’s license to the minor and impose the fines, penalties, or both, that he would have otherwise imposed, and such action shall constitute a conviction.
  6. Any person who has been charged with a violation of subsections (1) or (2) of this section may, not sooner than one (1) year after the dismissal and discharge or completion of any sentence and/or payment of any fine, apply to the court for an order to expunge from all official records all recordation relating to his arrest, trial, finding or plea of guilty, and dismissal and discharge. If the court determines that such person was dismissed and the proceedings against him discharged or that such person had satisfactorily served his sentence and/or paid his fine, it shall enter such order.

HISTORY: Laws, 1985, ch. 431, § 3; Laws 2002, ch. 570, § 5; Laws, 2011, ch. 435, § 2; Laws, 2011, ch 472, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 2011.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 2 of ch. 435, Laws of 2011, effective from and after July 1, 2011 (approved March 23, 2011), amended this section. Section 2 of ch. 472, Laws of 2011, effective from and after July 1, 2011 (approved March 30, 2011), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 2 of ch. 472, Laws of 2011, pursuant to Section 1-3-79 which provides that whenever the same section of law is amended by different bills during the same legislative session, and the effective dates of the amendments are the same, the amendment with the latest approval date shall supersede all other amendments to the same section approved on an earlier date.

Amendment Notes —

The first 2011 amendment (ch. 435), in (3), deleted “or makes available” preceding “light wine or beer to a person under the age of twenty-one (21)” in the first sentence, and added the last sentence.

The second 2011 amendment (ch. 472), in (3), deleted “or makes available” preceding “light wine or beer to a person under the age of twenty-one (21)” in the first sentence, and added the last sentence; and made minor stylistic changes.

Cross References —

Expungement of records of youth court, see §§43-21-159,43-21-265.

Transfer of cases to youth court, see §43-21-159.

Sale to underaged customer, see §67-3-53.

Exemption from prohibition of possession of light wine or beer by certain persons less than 21 years of age, see §67-3-54.

Penalty for sales to underaged customers, see §67-3-69.

Knowingly allowing party at residence or premises if minor at party obtains, possesses or consumes alcoholic beverage prohibited, see §97-5-49.

Imposition of standard state assessment in addition to all court imposed fines or other penalties for any misdemeanor violation, see §99-19-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

In order to establish liability by proving negligence on the part of a licensee, the plaintiff must prove, in addition to negligence per se (that the licensee violated Miss. Code Ann. §67-3-70 (Rev. 2001) by furnishing alcohol to a minor), that it was foreseeable that the minor to whom the alcohol was furnished would negligently cause injury to the plaintiff. Moore v. K&J Enters., 856 So. 2d 621, 2003 Miss. App. LEXIS 594 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), cert. dismissed, 2004 Miss. LEXIS 198 (Miss. Feb. 12, 2004).

Records of criminal offenses are kept pursuant to §45-27-1. The legislature of Mississippi has specifically authorized expungement of criminal offender records in limited cases-youth court cases, §§43-21-159 and43-21-265; first offense misdemeanor convictions occurring prior to age 23, §99-19-71; drug possession convictions occurring prior to age 26, §41-29-150; purchase of alcoholic beverages by one under age 21, §67-3-70; and municipal court convictions, §21-23-7. Expungement of felony convictions which arose pursuant to guilty pleas are governed by §99-15-57 which provides that any person who pled guilty within 6 months prior to the effective date of §99-15-26 may apply to the court for an order expunging his or her criminal records. Under §§99-15-57 and99-15-26 a circuit court has the power to expunge a felony conviction pursuant to a guilty plea under certain conditions. Accordingly, a petitioner who pled guilty to the felony of burglary might have been eligible for relief pursuant to §§ 99-15-57 and 99-15-26 if his guilty plea had occurred on or after October 1, 1982, that being the earliest date to satisfy the “within 6 months prior to” March 31, 1983, requirement of § 99-15-57. However, the petitioner pleaded guilty to burglary on October 9, 1979, 3 years prior to October 1, 1982, and admitted that he did not fall within the criterion in any of the statutes authorizing expungement, and thus the trial court did not err in denying his petition for expungement. Caldwell v. State, 564 So. 2d 1371, 1990 Miss. LEXIS 262 (Miss. 1990).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Mississippi Justice Information Center is not prohibited from entering the following crimes committed by individuals under 18 years of age into its database: (1) crimes punishable under state or federal law by life imprisonment or death; (2) offenses committed by a child on or after his seventeenth birthday where such offenses would be a felony if committed by an adult; (3) a hunting or fishing violation; (4) a traffic violation; (5) a violation of the Mississippi Implied Consent Law; or (6) a violation of Section 67-3-70. Spann, Jan. 24, 2000, A.G. Op. #99-0694.

Since possession of alcohol or light wine or beer by a minor is not a delinquent act, the youth court does not have original jurisdiction over such offenses. Wiggins, Sept. 19, 2003, A.G. Op. 03-0424.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

Criminal offense of selling liquor to a minor or permitting him to stay on licensed premises as affected by ignorance or mistake regarding his age. 12 A.L.R.3d 991.

Serving liquor to minor in home as unlawful sale or gift. 14 A.L.R.3d 1186.

What constitutes “sale” of liquor in violation of statute or ordinance. 89 A.L.R.3d 551.

What constitutes violation of enactment prohibiting sale of intoxicating liquor to minor. 89 A.L.R.3d 1256.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 220 et seq.

1 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 315, Proof of age.

CJS.

48 C.J.S. Intoxicating Liquor §§ 345-350, 460.

§ 67-3-71. Repealed.

Repealed by Laws of 1979, ch. 365, eff from and after July 1, 1979.

[Codes, Hutchison’s 1848, ch. 11, art. 2(18); 1857, ch. 20, art. 13; 1871, § 2464; 1880, § 1108; 1892, § 1589; 1906, § 1743; Hemingway’s 1917, § 2085; 1930, § 1973; 1942, § 2612; Laws, 1908, ch. 115]

Editor’s Notes —

Former §67-3-71 provided that a debt for liquors was not collectible.

§ 67-3-73. Immunity from liability of persons who lawfully furnished or sold intoxicating beverages to one causing damage.

  1. The Mississippi Legislature finds and declares that the consumption of intoxicating beverages, rather than the sale or serving or furnishing of such beverages, is the proximate cause of any injury, including death and property damage, inflicted by an intoxicated person upon himself or upon another person.
  2. Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no holder of an alcoholic beverage, beer or light wine permit, or any agent or employee of such holder, who lawfully sells or serves intoxicating beverages to a person who may lawfully purchase such intoxicating beverages, shall be liable to such person or to any other person or to the estate, or survivors of either, for any injury suffered off the licensed premises, including wrongful death and property damage, because of the intoxication of the person to whom the intoxicating beverages were sold or served.
  3. Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no social host who serves or furnishes any intoxicating beverage to a person who may lawfully consume such intoxicating beverage shall be liable to such person or to any other person or to the estate, or survivors of either, for any injury suffered off such social host’s premises, including wrongful death and property damage, because of the intoxication of the person to whom the intoxicating beverages were served or furnished. No social host who owns, leases or otherwise lawfully occupies a premises on which, in his absence and without his consent, intoxicating beverages are consumed by a person who may lawfully consume such intoxicating beverage shall be liable to such person or to any other person or to the estate, or survivors of either, for any injury suffered off the premises, including wrongful death and property damage, because of the intoxication of the person who consumed the intoxicating beverages.
  4. The limitation of liability provided by this section shall not apply to any person who causes or contributes to the consumption of alcoholic beverages by force or by falsely representing that a beverage contains no alcohol, or to any holder of an alcoholic beverage, beer or light wine permit, or any agent or employee of such holder when it is shown that the person making a purchase of an alcoholic beverage was at the time of such purchase visibly intoxicated.

HISTORY: Laws, 1987, ch. 451, eff from and after April 3, 1987 (became law without Governor’s signature on April 3, 1987).

Cross References —

Prohibition against sale of liquor to persons visibly intoxicated, as well as to certain other persons, see §67-1-83.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Evidence.

1.5. Liability.

2. No liability.

3. No exemption for distinction based on “making a purchase”.

4. Construction.

1. Evidence.

Where plaintiff sued a casino and a bar for wrongful death pursuant to Mississippi’s Dram Shop Act, Miss. Code Ann. §67-3-73, expert testimony that the driver who killed decedent was visibly intoxicated when he was served alcohol precluded the entry of summary judgment for defendants under Miss. R. Civ. P. 56. Expert’s testimony was based on Intoxilyzer results taken an hour after the accident indicating that the driver’s BAC was 0.088% and a blood sample indicating a BAC of 0.07%. Treasure Bay Corp. v. Ricard, 967 So. 2d 1235, 2007 Miss. LEXIS 617 (Miss. 2007).

Casino offered assistance to the adult invitee who had been drinking for hours and the record reflected that she was attended by casino staff after she fell to the floor. A casino staff member suggested that she seek the attention of a physician and further offered to summon an ambulance, however the adult invitee refused that suggestion as well; thus, the casino did not breach a duty of care, and in any event, where the record showed the invitee became voluntarily intoxicated (she later died at home as a result of aspirating on her own vomit), she was not a member of the class protected by Miss. Code. Ann. §67-3-73 and summary judgment for the casino was proper. Estate of White v. Rainbow Casino-Vicksburg P'ship, 910 So. 2d 713, 2005 Miss. App. LEXIS 192 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005).

In an action against a retail business that sold beer to a visibly intoxicated driver about two hours before an accident which killed a five year old child, the defendant was not entitled to summary judgment on the basis of an affidavit by the driver that she did not drink the alcoholic beverages purchased from it on the day of the accident and an affidavit by the driver’s boyfriend and future husband which corrobrated that statement where (1) the driver had reason to lie, given her pending criminal trial arising from the same accident, (2) the credibility of the driver’s boyfriend and future husband was suspect given his relationship to the driver, and (3) the plaintiff presented circumstantial evidence that the driver’s level of intoxication increased throughout the day, that she must have consumed a large volume of alcohol to have been as visibly drunk as she was by the time of the accident, and that such volume must have consisted in significant part of some beer purchased from the defendant. Thomas v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 233 F.3d 326, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 29652 (5th Cir. Miss. 2000).

1.5. Liability.

Under Mississippi’s Dram Shop Act, Miss. Code Ann. §67-3-73(4) (2005), which required proof that a customer was served alcohol when he was visibly intoxicated, a casino was liable for damages from the customer’s car accident as the expert of the wrongful-death heirs testified that the driver’s blood alcohol content was high enough that trained personnel should have spotted the driver’s intoxication. However, under Miss. Code Ann. §85-5-7(3), which was in effect when the suit was filed, joint and several liability was limited to fifty percent of recoverable damages. Robinson Prop. Group, Ltd. P'ship v. McCalman, 51 So.3d 946, 2011 Miss. LEXIS 19 (Miss. 2011).

2. No liability.

Nightclub owners were entitled to summary judgment when an accident victim alleged that the nightclub negligently served alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person because the victim failed to prove that the nightclub served a visibly intoxicated person, or that the person’s intoxication proximately caused the victim’s injuries when the victim fell out the backseat of the truck which the person was driving, after leaving the nightclub, and was run over by the truck. Rausch v. Barlow Woods, Inc., 204 So.3d 796, 2016 Miss. App. LEXIS 767 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016).

Casino patron’s claim of negligence per se in connection with injuries she allegedly sustained when a cocktail waitress dropped a tray of drinks on or near the patron, while attempting to serve another customer, failed because there was no evidence that the casino violated Mississippi’s dram shop act, Miss Code Ann. §67-3-73, where there was nothing to show that the customer was visibly intoxicated. Callender v. Imperial Palace of Miss., LLC, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71292 (S.D. Miss. Sept. 19, 2008).

Customer who suffered injuries after voluntarily consuming alcohol is not part of the protected class of Miss. Code Ann. §67-3-73; therefore, a casino’s motion to dismiss a negligence action was properly granted since there was no liability under either §67-3-73 or Miss. Code Ann. §67-1-83. Bridges v. Park Place Entm't, Inc., 860 So. 2d 811, 2003 Miss. LEXIS 758 (Miss. 2003).

3. No exemption for distinction based on “making a purchase”.

Legislature does not intend to exempt businesses from liability under Miss. Code Ann. §67-3-73(4) based on a distinction of “making a purchase” as opposed to “being furnished” alcoholic beverages; therefore, it did not matter that a casino did not directly sell alcohol to a customer, but the casino was still not liable to a customer that was injured after voluntarily drinking alcohol. Bridges v. Park Place Entm't, Inc., 860 So. 2d 811, 2003 Miss. LEXIS 758 (Miss. 2003).

4. Construction.

Under the Mississippi Supreme Court’s holdings in Bridges v. Park Place Entertainment, 860 So. 2d 811 (Miss. 2003), and Cuevas v. Royal D’Iberville Hotel, 498 So. 2d 346 (Miss. 1986), if an “adult” voluntarily consumes intoxicants and subsequently injures himself or herself due to her intoxicated condition, he or she is not a member of the class protected by Miss. Code. Ann. §67-3-73. In the context of summary judgment, the question becomes whether there exists an issue of fact as to the voluntariness of said person’s intoxication; if a genuine issue of material fact exists, summary judgment is improper. Estate of White v. Rainbow Casino-Vicksburg P'ship, 910 So. 2d 713, 2005 Miss. App. LEXIS 192 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

What statute of limitations applies to action under dramshop or civil damage act. 55 A.L.R.2d 1286.

Right to recover under civil damage or dramshop act for death of intoxicated person. 64 A.L.R.2d 705.

Liability of liquor furnisher under civil damage or dramshop act for injury or death of intoxicated person from wrongful act of a third person. 65 A.L.R.2d 923.

Liability of innkeeper, restaurateur, or tavernkeeper for injury occurring on or about premises to guest or patron by person other than proprietor or his servant. 70 A.L.R.2d 628.

Liability, under dramshop acts, of one who sells or furnishes liquor otherwise than in operation of regularly established liquor business. 8 A.L.R.3d 1412.

Who is, as “owner” of premises on which intoxicating liquor is sold, liable under civil damage or dram shop acts. 18 A.L.R.3d 1323.

Third person’s participating in or encouraging drinking as barring him from recovery under civil damage or similar acts. 26 A.L.R.3d 1112.

Intoxicating liquors: right of one liable under Civil Damage Act to contribution or indemnity from intoxicated person, or vice versa. 31 A.L.R.3d 438.

Proof of causation of intoxication as a prerequisite to recovery under Civil Damage Act. 64 A.L.R.3d 882.

Civil Damages Act: liability of one who furnishes liquor to another for consumption by third parties, for injury to or damage caused by consumer. 64 A.L.R.3d 922.

Carrier’s liability based on serving intoxicants to passenger. 76 A.L.R.3d 1218.

What constitutes “sale” of liquor in violation of statute or ordinance. 89 A.L.R.3d 551.

Liability of state or municipality in tort action for damages arising out of sale of intoxicating liquor by state or municipally operated liquor store or establishment. 95 A.L.R.3d 1243.

Common-law right of action for damage sustained by plaintiff in consequence of sale or gift of intoxicating liquor or habit-forming drug to another. 97 A.L.R.3d 528.

Liability of persons furnishing intoxicating liquor for injury to or death of consumer, outside coverage of civil damage acts. 98 A.L.R.3d 1230.

Choice of law as to liability of liquor seller for injuries caused by intoxicated person. 2 A.L.R.4th 952.

Liability of hotel or motel operator for injury to guest resulting from assault by third party. 28 A.L.R.4th 80.

Tavernkeeper’s liability to patron for third person’s assault. 43 A.L.R.4th 281.

Intoxicating liquors: employer’s liability for furnishing or permitting liquor on social occasion. 51 A.L.R.4th 1048.

Social host’s liability for injuries incurred by third parties as a result of intoxicated guest’s negligence. 62 A.L.R.4th 16.

Validity, construction, and effect of statute limiting amount recoverable in dram shop action. 78 A.L.R.4th 542.

Social host’s liability for death or injuries incurred by person to whom alcohol was served. 54 A.L.R.5th 313.

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 458-520.

3 Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Automobiles and Highway Traffic, Form 299.1 (Head-on collision – Intoxicated driver driving in wrong direction – By decedent’s representative – Against tavern).

14A Am. Jur. Pl & Pr Forms (Rev), Negligence, Form 78.1 (Complaint, petition, or declaration – By valet – Against social hosts and intoxicated minor driver – For injuries sustained when struck by vehicle at party).

CJS.

48A C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors § 635, 645, 652, 653.

§ 67-3-74. Enforcement of certain provisions by officers of the division.

  1. In addition to peace officers within their jurisdiction, all enforcement officers of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the Department of Revenue are authorized to enforce the provisions made unlawful by this chapter and Section 97-5-49; however, the provisions prohibiting the sale of light wine or beer to persons under the age of twenty-one (21) years shall be enforced by the division as provided for in this section.
    1. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Division shall investigate violations of the laws prohibiting the sale of light wine or beer to persons under the age of twenty-one (21) years upon receipt of a complaint or information from a person stating that they have knowledge of such violation.
    2. Upon receipt of such complaint or information, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division shall notify the permit holder of the complaint by certified mail to the primary business office of such permit holder or by hand delivery of the complaint or information to the primary business office of such holder, except in cases where the complaint or information is received from any law enforcement officer.
    3. If an enforcement officer of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division enters the business of the holder of the permit to investigate a complaint and discovers a violation, the agent shall notify the person that committed the violation and the holder of the permit:
      1. Within ten (10) days after such violation, Sundays and holidays excluded, if the business sells light wine or beer for on-premises consumption; and
      2. Within seventy-two (72) hours after such violation, Sundays and holidays excluded, if the business does not sell light wine or beer for on-premises consumption.

HISTORY: Laws, 2002, ch. 570, § 1; Laws, 2003, ch. 392, § 4; Laws, 2005, ch. 462, § 4; Laws, 2007, ch. 462, § 6; Laws, 2011, ch. 379, § 4; Laws, 2016, ch. 470, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 2016.

Amendment Notes —

The 2003 amendment extended the date of the repealer in (3) from July 1, 2003 until July 1, 2005.

The 2005 amendment extended the date of the repealer provision in (3) from “July 1, 2005” until “July 1, 2007.”

The 2007 amendment inserted “67-3-57” following “67-3-53” in (1); and extended the date of the repealer in (3) from July 1, 2007, until July 1, 2011.

The 2011 amendment substituted “Department of Revenue” for “State Tax Commission” in (1); and deleted former (3) which repealed the section July 1, 2011.

The 2016 amendment substituted “unlawful by this chapter and Section 97-5-49; however, the provisions” for “unlawful by Sections 67-3-13, 67-3-15, 67-3-53, 67-3-57, and 67-3-70; provided, however, that the provisions” in (1).

Cross References —

Prohibition against possession of light wine and beer in dry counties, see §67-3-13.

Prohibition against the brewing, manufacture or sale of any beer or light wine without first securing permit and/or license from commissioner, see §67-3-15.

Additional unlawful acts by holder of a permit authorizing the sale of beer or light wine at retail, see §67-3-53.

Prohibition against possessing or selling light wine or beer before permit secured or during time of revocation or suspension, see §67-3-57.

Penalties for purchase of light wine or beer by person under the age of 21, see §67-3-70.

§ 67-3-75. Repealed.

Repealed by operation of law on July 1, 2000, by Laws, 1998, ch. 520, § 4.

[Laws, 1997, ch. 558, § 1; reenacted and amended, Laws, 1998, ch. 520, § 4, eff from and after July 1, 1998, and shall stand repealed from and after July 1, 2000]

Editor’s Notes —

Former §67-3-75 was entitled “Enforcement.”

Laws, 1998, ch. 520, § 5, provides as follows:

“SECTION 5. Section 5, Chapter 558, Laws of 1997, which repeals, effective July 1, 1998, Sections 67-1-37, 67-3-31, 67-3-37 and 67-3-75, Mississippi Code of 1972, is repealed.”

Chapter 5. Native Wines

§ 67-5-1. Short title.

This chapter shall be cited as the “Mississippi Native Wine Law of 1976.”

HISTORY: Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved May 25, 1976).

Cross References —

Definition and content requirements of “native wine,” see §67-1-5.

Board of Tax Appeals to have jurisdiction over all administrative appeals regarding certain decisions and actions by the Department of Revenue under §§67-5-1 et seq., as provided for under §67-1-72, see §27-4-3.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Since the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.) consists of laws relating specifically to one form of alcoholic beverage, it is, as such, special legislation which will prevail over the general statutes dealing with alcohol that are contained in Chapter 1 of Title 67 (67-1-1 et seq). Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

§ 67-5-3. Legislative declaration of intent.

The Legislature of the State of Mississippi, recognizes, by the passage of this chapter, the vital contribution of the agricultural industry to the economy of this state, and declares that the intent of this chapter is to enhance and expand such industry by authorizing and encouraging the domestic production of native wines from grapes, berries, fruits, honey and vegetables grown and produced in Mississippi.

The Legislature further recognizes the vital contribution of the tourist industry to the economy of this state, and declares that the intent of this chapter is to enhance such industry by encouraging the planting and development of native vineyards, the construction of native wineries, and the production and sale of native wines so that tourists traveling through Mississippi may visit vineyards, wineries and wine cellars, and purchase Mississippi domestic wines.

The Legislature of the State of Mississippi further recognizes the need for the expansion, diversification and development of Mississippi economy, and declares that the intent of this chapter is to authorize and encourage the introduction of a new industry into this state which will provide new employment opportunities, additional income, and support for existing industries in this state.

HISTORY: Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 2; Laws, 1991, ch. 444, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 1991.

Cross References —

Definition and content requirements of “native wine,” see §67-1-5.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Under the provisions of the Native Wine Act (§§67-5-1 et seq.), the manufacturer, possession, and sale of native wines are legal throughout the state. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

§ 67-5-5. Definitions; qualification period.

For purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the definitions ascribed herein, unless the context otherwise requires:

“Native wine” shall mean any product, produced in Mississippi for sale, having an alcohol content not to exceed twenty-one percent (21%) by weight and made in accordance with revenue laws of the United States, which shall be obtained primarily from the alcoholic fermentation of the juice of ripe grapes, fruits, berries, honey or vegetables grown and produced in Mississippi; provided that bulk, concentrated or fortified wines used for blending may be produced without this state and used in producing native wines. The commission shall adopt and promulgate rules and regulations to permit a producer to import such bulk and/or fortified wines into this state for use in blending with native wines without payment of any excise tax that would otherwise accrue thereon. In order to be classified as “native wine” under the provisions of this chapter, at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the finished product by volume shall have been obtained from fermentation of grapes, fruits, berries, honey or vegetables grown and produced in Mississippi.

“Native winery” shall mean any place or establishment within this state where native wine is produced in whole or in part for sale.

“Produce” shall mean to do or to perform any act or thing in the process of making native wine.

“Person” shall mean one or more natural persons, or a corporation, partnership or association.

“Producer” shall mean any person who owns, operates or conducts a native winery, but it does not mean the employees of such persons.

“Consumer” shall mean any person who purchases native wine for the purpose of consuming it, giving it away, or distributing it in any way other than by sale, barter or exchange.

“Commission” shall mean the Mississippi State Tax Commission.

“Division” shall mean the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the State Tax Commission.

HISTORY: Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 3; Laws, 1977, ch. 488, § 1; Laws, 1991, ch. 444, § 2, eff from and after July 1, 1991.

Cross References —

Operation of native winery for qualification period, see §67-1-5.

Right of native wineries to advertise sale of native wines, see §67-1-85.

§ 67-5-7. Production and sale of native wine legalized.

Hereafter, it shall be lawful to produce native wine in the State of Mississippi including the production of non-alcoholic native wines and juices to be used for sacramental purposes, and to sell such native wine within or without this state; provided such native wine shall be subject to the gallonage excise tax as levied by Section 67-5-13.

The production of native wine is hereby declared, under the laws of this state, to be a privilege, and as such privilege shall be subject to such permit fees upon the exercise of the privilege as levied by Section 67-5-13.

HISTORY: Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 4, eff from and after passage (approved May 25, 1976).

Cross References —

Annual privilege tax imposed on manufacturers and retailers of native wines, see §27-71-5.

Excise tax upon cases of native wine, see §27-71-7.

Amount of bond required of producer of native wine, see §27-71-21.

Definition and content requirements of “native wine,” see §67-1-5.

Effect of local option for prohibition on holders of native wine producer’s and retailer’s permits, see §67-1-13.

Native wine producers’ permits and retailers’ permits, see §67-1-51.

Records and reports by native wine producers and transporters of native wine, see §67-1-73.

§ 67-5-9. Permits for native wineries; registration of native wineries with secretary of state.

  1. Every native winery in the State of Mississippi shall apply for a permit as provided for in Section 67-1-51, Mississippi Code of 1972, and shall be issued said initial and renewal permit by the commission upon meeting the qualifications and requirements presently set forth by law or regulation for permits authorized by said Section 67-1-51.
  2. Every native winery shall register with the Secretary of State, shall show the location and permit number of said winery, shall show the name and address of the producer owning, conducting or operating the winery, shall show the name and address of all local agents and such other pertinent information which may be required by the Secretary of State, and shall appoint an agent for service of process within the State of Mississippi.

HISTORY: Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 5, eff from and after passage (approved May 25, 1976).

Cross References —

Amount of bond required of producer of native wine, see §27-71-21.

Definition of “native winery,” see §67-1-5.

Effect of local option for prohibition on holders of native wine producer’s and retailer’s permits, see §67-1-13.

Records and reports by native wine producers and transporters of native wine, see §67-1-73.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. In general.

Since the state at trial chose to proceed on the indictment charging the defendant with distilling wine in violation of §97-3-21, it could not argue for affirmance of his conviction on proof that he did not have a valid permit issued under the Native Wine Act. Martin v. State, 501 So. 2d 1124, 1987 Miss. LEXIS 2285 (Miss. 1987).

§ 67-5-11. Authorized sales by native wineries.

Within the State of Mississippi, every native winery is authorized to make sales to the commission or to consumers at the location of the native winery or its immediate vicinity. Every native winery is authorized to make sales to any producer, manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer or consumer located outside of the State of Mississippi who are authorized by law to purchase the same.

HISTORY: Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 6; Laws, 2006, ch. 352, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2006.

Amendment Notes —

The 2006 amendment rewrote the section to allow native wineries to sell native wines directly to consumers in Mississippi only at the location of the native winery or its immediate vicinity and to prohibit direct sales of native wines by native wineries to retail permittees.

Cross References —

Annual privilege tax imposed on manufacturers and retailers of native wines, see §27-71-5.

Excise tax upon cases of native wine, see §27-71-7.

Definition of “native winery,” see §67-1-5.

Effect of local option for prohibition on holders of native wine producer’s and retailer’s permits, see §67-1-13.

Native wine producers’ permits and retailers’ permits, see §67-1-51.

Records and reports by native wine producers and transporters of native wine, see §67-1-73.

§ 67-5-13. Annual privilege license tax on producers; excise tax on cases sold by producers.

  1. Upon every producer holding a permit for the production of native wine, there is levied and imposed for each location for the privilege of engaging and continuing in this state in the production of native wine an annual privilege license tax in an amount equal to Ten Dollars ($10.00) for each ten thousand (10,000) gallons, or any part thereof, of native wine produced by the winery.
  2. There is levied and assessed an excise tax upon each case of native wine sold by a producer to any source to be collected from the producer in the amount provided for in Section 27-71-7. However, native wine produced in Mississippi for export and sale without this state and native wine produced in Mississippi and sold to the commission shall not be subject to the excise tax, nor shall the tax accrue or be collected on native wines dispensed, as free samples in quantities of not more than six (6) ounces, in the tasting room of a native winery.
  3. The privilege tax imposed by subsection (1) of this section shall be collected in the same manner as presently provided by law for the collection of other alcoholic beverages. The excise tax imposed by subsection (2) of this section shall be reported monthly by the producer to the commission on all sales made in Mississippi to consumers at the location of the native winery or its immediate vicinity, along with a statement of gallonage produced during that month, and the producer shall remit the tax due and owing with each report. The producer shall also include in the report a statement of gallonage sold and exported for sale outside this state.
  4. All taxes levied by and collected under this section shall be deposited in the General Fund.

HISTORY: Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 7; Laws, 1985, ch. 322, § 2; Laws, 2006, ch. 352, § 2; Laws, 2006, ch. 508, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2006.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 2 of ch. 352, Laws, 2006, effective from and after July 1, 2006 (approved March 13, 2006), amended this section. Section 1 of ch. 508, Laws, 2006, effective from and after July 1, 2006 (approved March 29, 2006), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of Section 1 of ch. 508, Laws, 2006, pursuant to Section 1-3-79 which provides that whenever the same section of law is amended by different bills during the same legislative session, and the effective dates of the amendments are the same, the amendment with the latest approval date shall supersede all other amendments to the same section approved on an earlier date.

Amendment Notes —

The first 2006 amendment (ch. 352), inserted “and to consumers at the location of the native winery or its immediate vicinity” following “Mississippi to the commission” in (3).

The second 2006 amendment (ch. 508), in (2), deleted “Mississippi Code of 1972” following “27-71-7” at the end of the first sentence, and inserted “and native wine produced in Mississippi and sold to the commission” in the last sentence; substituted “consumers at the location of the native winery or its immediate vicinity” for “the commission, retailers, consumers or any alcoholic beverage permittee of the commission” in (3); and made minor stylistic changes throughout.

Cross References —

Annual privilege tax imposed on manufacturers and retailers of native wines, see §27-71-5.

Excise tax upon cases of native wine, see §27-71-7.

Amount of bond required of producer of native wine, see §27-71-21.

Native wine producers’ permits and retailers’ permits, see §67-1-51.

§ 67-5-15. Repealed.

Repealed by Laws of 2006, ch. 529, § 12 effective from and after passage (approved April 3, 2006.)

[Laws, 1976, ch. 467, § 8, eff from and after passage (approved May 25, 1976).]

Editor’s Notes —

Former §67-5-15 required producers of native wine to affix a tax stamp to individual bottles or containers of native wine.

Chapter 7. Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act

§ 67-7-1. Short title.

This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act.”

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

§ 67-7-3. Purpose.

The legislative purpose of this chapter is to provide a structure for the business relations between a wholesaler and a supplier of light wine or beer. Regulation in this area is considered necessary for the following reasons:

To maintain stability and healthy competition in the light wine and beer industry in this state.

To promote and maintain a sound, stable and viable system of distribution of light wine and beer to the public.

To provide for the private settlement of disputes between wholesalers and suppliers of light wine or beer as an alternative to civil litigation which consumes the time and resources of the parties and the judicial system.

To promote the public health, safety and welfare.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 2, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Dismissal.

Circuit court erred in dismissing a wholesaler’s complaint for failure to state a claim because the wholesaler alleged that the Mississippi Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act rendered the match-and-redirect provision of the parties’ distribution contract null and void, and a beer supplier’s demands premised on the void provision could have amounted to unjustified “interference” with the wholesaler’s transfer to an allegedly qualified transferee. Rex Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 271 So.3d 445, 2019 Miss. LEXIS 205 (Miss. 2019).

§ 67-7-5. Definitions.

As used in this chapter, the following words or phrases, or the plural thereof, whenever they appear in this chapter, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section.

“Agreement” means any agreement between a wholesaler and a supplier, whether oral or written, whereby a wholesaler is granted the right to purchase and sell a brand or brands of light wine or beer sold by a supplier.

“Ancillary business” means a business owned by the wholesaler, by a substantial stockholder of a wholesaler, or by a substantial partner of a wholesaler, the primary business of which is directly related to the transporting, storing or marketing of the brand or brands of light wine or beer of a supplier with whom the wholesaler has an agreement; or a business owned by a wholesaler, a substantial stockholder of a wholesaler.

“Commission” or “department” means the Department of Revenue of the State of Mississippi.

“Commissioner” means the Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue.

“Designated member” means the spouse, child, grandchild, parent, brother or sister of a deceased individual who owned an interest, including a controlling interest, in a wholesaler, or any person who inherits under the deceased individual’s will, or under the laws of intestate succession of this state; or any person who or entity which has otherwise, through a valid testamentary device by the deceased individual, succeeded the deceased individual in the wholesaler’s business, or has succeeded to the deceased individual’s ownership interest in the wholesaler pursuant to a written contract or instrument which has been previously approved by supplier; “designated member” includes the appointed and qualified personal representative and the testamentary trustee of a deceased individual owning an ownership interest in a wholesaler, and it includes the person appointed by a court as the guardian or conservator of the property of an incapacitated individual owning an ownership interest in a wholesaler.

“Establish” means to adjust or regulate, to provide for and uphold.

“Good faith” means honesty in fact and observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade, as defined in and interpreted under the Uniform Commercial Code.

“Reasonable qualifications” means the standard of the reasonable criteria established and consistently used by the respective supplier for similarly situated wholesalers that entered into, continued or renewed an agreement with the supplier during a period of twenty-four (24) months before the proposed transfer of the wholesaler’s business, or for similarly situated wholesalers who have changed managers or designated managers, under the agreement, during a period of twenty-four (24) months before the proposed change in the manager or successor manager of the wholesaler’s business.

“Retaliatory action” means the refusal to continue an agreement, or a material reduction in the quality of service or quantity of products available to a wholesaler under an agreement, which refusal or reduction is not made in good faith.

“Sales territory” means a primary area of sales responsibility for the brand or brands of light wine or beer sold by a supplier as designated by an agreement.

“Substantial stockholder or substantial partner” means a stockholder of or partner in the wholesaler who owns an interest of ten percent (10%) or more of the partnership or of the capital stock of a corporate wholesaler.

“Successor” means a person who replaces a supplier with regard to the right to manufacture, sell, distribute or import a brand or brands of light wine or beer.

“Supplier” means a manufacturer or importer of light wine or beer as regulated by the department under Sections 67-3-1 through 67-3-73.

“Transfer of wholesaler’s business” means the voluntary sale, assignment or other transfer of ten percent (10%) or more of control of the business or all or substantially all of the assets of the wholesaler, or ten percent (10%) or more of control of the capital stocks of the wholesaler, including without limitation the sale or other transfer of capital stock or assets by merger, consolidation or dissolution, or of the capital stock of the parent corporation, or of the capital stock or beneficial ownership of any other entity owning or controlling the wholesaler.

“Wholesaler” means a wholesaler of light wine or beer as regulated by the department under Sections 67-3-1 through 67-3-73.

“Similarly situated wholesalers” means wholesalers of a supplier that are of a generally comparable size and operate in markets in Mississippi and adjoining states with similar demographic characteristics, including population size, density, distribution and vital statistics, as well as reasonably similar economic and geographic conditions.

“Light wine and/or beer” has the meaning ascribed to such terms in Section 67-3-5.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 3; Laws, 2009, ch. 342, § 2; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 137, eff from and after July 1, 2010.

Joint Legislative Committee Note —

Section 2 of ch. 342, Laws of 2009, effective from and after passage (approved March 16, 2009) amended this section. Section 137 of ch. 492, Laws of 2009, effective July 1, 2010 (approved on April 6, 2009), also amended this section. As set out above, this section reflects the language of both amendments pursuant to Section 1-1-109 which gives the Joint Legislative Committee on Compilation, Revision, and Publication authority to integrate amendments so that all versions of the same code section enacted within the same legislative session may become effective. The Joint Committee on Compilation, Revision, and Publication ratified the integration of these amendments as consistent with the legislative intent at the July 13, 2009, meeting of the Committee.

Editor’s Notes —

Laws of 2009, ch. 492, § 144 provides:

“SECTION 144. Nothing in this act shall affect or defeat any assessment, refund claim, request for waiver of a tax penalty, the suspension, revocation, surrender, seizure or denial of permit, tag or title, the suspension, revocation or denial of a permit, approved manager status, qualified resort area or forfeiture under the Local Option Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Section 67-1-1 et seq., the administrative appeal or judicial appeal of any of the foregoing acts or any other action taken by the Mississippi State Tax Commission or by the Chairman of the Mississippi State Tax Commission prior to the effective date of this act. The provisions of the laws relating to the administrative appeal or judicial review of such actions which were in effect prior to the effective date of this act are expressly continued in full force, effect and operation for the purpose of providing an administrative appeal and/or judicial review, where previously provided, of such actions, except to the extent that any matter is pending on an administrative appeal before the three (3) member Mississippi State Tax Commission on the effective date will after the effective date of this act be heard and decided by the Board of Tax Appeals as the successor of the Mississippi State Tax Commission in regard to administrative appeals.”

Amendment Notes —

The first 2009 amendment (ch. 342) added ( l ); and redesignated former ( l ) through (p) as present (m) through (q).

The second 2009 amendment (ch. 492), effective from and after July 1, 2010, substituted “‘Commission’ or ‘department’ means the Department of Revenue” for “‘Commission’ means the State Tax Commission” in (c); substituted “Commissioner of Revenue of the Department of Revenue” for “Chairman of the State Tax Commission” in (d); and substituted “department” for “State Tax Commission” in ( l ) (now(m)) and (n) (now(o)).

Cross References —

Department of revenue generally, see §27-3-1 et seq.

Commissioner of revenue of the department of revenue, see §§27-3-3,27-3-4.

Designation of sales territories for light wine and beer, see §27-71-349.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Dismissal.

2. Interfere.

1. Dismissal.

Circuit court erred in dismissing a wholesaler’s complaint for failure to state a claim because the wholesaler alleged that the Mississippi Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act rendered the match-and-redirect provision of the parties’ distribution contract null and void, and a beer supplier’s demands premised on the void provision could have amounted to unjustified “interference” with the wholesaler’s transfer to an allegedly qualified transferee. Rex Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 271 So.3d 445, 2019 Miss. LEXIS 205 (Miss. 2019).

2. Interfere.

It is impossible for a supplier to tortiously interfere with the sale of its distribution rights, because the supplier is a party to the contract for the sale of its distribution rights. Rex Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 271 So.3d 445, 2019 Miss. LEXIS 205 (Miss. 2019).

§ 67-7-7. Prohibited acts; suppliers.

  1. A supplier shall not do the following:
    1. Fail to provide each wholesaler of the supplier’s brand or brands with a written agreement which contains in total the supplier’s agreement with each wholesaler, and designates a specific sales territory. Any agreement which is in existence on April 7, 1995 shall be renewed consistent with this chapter, provided that this chapter may be incorporated by reference in the agreement. Nothing contained herein shall prevent a supplier from appointing, one (1) time for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days, a wholesaler to service temporarily a sales territory not designated to another wholesaler, until such time as a wholesaler is appointed by the supplier; and such wholesaler who is designated to service the sales territory during this period of temporary service shall not be in violation of the chapter, and, with respect to the temporary service territory, shall not have any of the rights provided under Sections 67-7-11 and 67-7-15.
    2. Fix, maintain or establish the price at which a wholesaler shall sell any light wine or beer.
    3. Enter into an additional agreement with any other wholesaler for, or to sell to any other wholesaler, the same brand or brands of light wine or beer in the same territory or any portion thereof, or to sell directly to any retailer in this state.
    4. Require any wholesaler to accept delivery of any light wine or beer or other commodity which has not been ordered by the wholesaler, except that a supplier may impose reasonable inventory requirements upon a wholesaler if the requirements are made in good faith and are generally applied to other similarly situated wholesalers who have an agreement with the supplier.
    5. Require any wholesaler to accept delivery of any light wine or beer or other commodity ordered by a wholesaler if the order was properly cancelled by the wholesaler in accordance with the supplier’s procedure.
    6. Require any wholesaler to do any illegal act or to violate any law or regulation by threatening to amend, modify, cancel, terminate or refuse to renew any agreement existing between the supplier and wholesaler.
    7. Require a wholesaler to assent to any condition, stipulation or provision limiting the wholesaler’s right to sell the brand or brands of light wine or beer of any other supplier unless the acquisition of the brand or brands of another supplier would materially impair or adversely affect the wholesaler’s quality of service, sales or ability to compete effectively in representing the brand or brands of the supplier presently being sold by the wholesaler, except that in any action challenging a supplier’s position, the supplier shall have the burden of providing that such acquisition of such other brand or brands would have such effect.
    8. Require a wholesaler to purchase one or more brands of light wine or beer products in order for the wholesaler to purchase another brand or brands of light wine or beer for any reason, except that a wholesaler that has agreed to distribute a brand or brands before April 7, 1995 shall continue to distribute the brand or brands in conformance with this chapter.
    9. Require a wholesaler to submit audited profit and loss statements, balance sheets or financial records as a condition of renewal or continuation of an agreement, except that a supplier may require reasonable proof of a wholesaler’s financial condition prior to extending credit terms to a wholesaler.
    10. Withhold delivery of light wine or beer ordered by wholesaler, or change a wholesaler’s quota of a brand or brands if the withholding or change is not made in good faith.
    11. Require a wholesaler by any means directly to participate in or contribute to any local or national advertising fund controlled directly or indirectly by a supplier.
    12. Take any retaliatory action against a wholesaler that files a complaint in good faith regarding an alleged violation by the supplier of federal, state or local law or an administrative rule as a result of that complaint.
    13. Require or prohibit any change in the manager or successor manager of any wholesaler who has been approved by the supplier as of or after April 7, 1995 unless the supplier acts in good faith. Should a wholesaler change an approved manager or successor manager, a supplier shall not require or prohibit the change unless the person selected by the wholesaler fails to meet the nondiscriminatory, material and reasonable standards and qualifications for managers consistently applied to similarly situated wholesalers by the supplier, except that, in any action challenging a supplier’s decision, the supplier shall have the burden of proving that such person fails to meet such standards and qualifications.
    14. Upon written notice of intent to transfer the wholesaler’s business, interfere with, prevent or unreasonably delay (not to exceed thirty (30) days) the transfer of the wholesaler’s business if the proposed transferee is a designated member.
    15. Upon written notice of intent to transfer the wholesaler’s business other than to a designated member, withhold consent to or approval of, or unreasonably delay (not to exceed thirty (30) days after receipt of all material information reasonably requested) a response to a request by the wholesaler for any transfer of a wholesaler’s business if the proposed transferee meets the nondiscriminatory material and reasonable qualifications and standards required by the supplier for similarly situated wholesalers.
    16. Restrict or inhibit the right of free association among wholesalers for any lawful purpose.
    17. Threaten to cancel or withhold credit, or to reduce the time period normally given the wholesaler to make payment on a delivery from the supplier as a means of compelling the wholesaler to meet certain standards of performance in any area of business not directly related to credit.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 4, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

Editor’s Notes —

This section was enacted with a subsection (1), but no subsection (2).

Cross References —

Designation of sales territories for light wine and beer, see §27-71-349.

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Section 67-7-7 authorizes a county to recover its costs for dismantling and removing a damaged and abandoned manufactured home from a public roadway by filing suit against the owner in justice court. White, Nov. 14, 2005, A.G. Op. 05-0542.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94, 209.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors § 297, 298.

§ 67-7-9. Prohibited acts; wholesalers.

A wholesaler shall not do any of the following:

Fail to devote such efforts and resources to the sale and distribution of all the supplier’s brands of light wine or beer which the wholesaler has been granted the right to sell or distribute as are required in the wholesaler’s agreement with the supplier.

Sell or deliver light wine or beer to a retail licensee located outside the sales territory designated to the wholesaler by the supplier of a particular brand or brands of light wine or beer, except that during periods of temporary service interruptions impacting a particular sales territory, a supplier may appoint another wholesaler to service the sales territory during the period of temporary service interruption. A wholesaler who is designated to service the impacted sales territory during the period of temporary service interruption shall not be in violation of this chapter and shall not have any of the rights provided under Sections 67-7-11 and 67-7-15 with respect to the temporary service territory.

Transfer the wholesaler’s business without giving the supplier written notice of intent to transfer the wholesaler’s business and, where required by this chapter, receiving the supplier’s written approval for the proposed transfer, except that the consent or approval of the supplier shall not be required of any transfer of the wholesaler’s business to a designated member, or of any transfer of less than ten percent (10%) of the wholesaler’s business unless such transfer results in a change in control. The wholesaler shall give the supplier written notice of any change in ownership of the wholesaler.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 5, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors § 94.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

§ 67-7-11. Amendment, modification, cancellation, termination, nonrenewal, or discontinuance of agreements by suppliers.

  1. Except as otherwise provided for in this chapter, a supplier shall not amend or modify an agreement; cause a wholesaler to resign from an agreement; or cancel, terminate, fail to renew or refuse to continue under an agreement, unless the supplier has complied with all of the following:
    1. Has satisfied the applicable notice requirements of this section.
    2. Has acted in good faith.
    3. Has good cause for the amendment, modification, cancellation, termination, nonrenewal, discontinuance or forced resignation.
  2. In any action challenging such amendment, modification, termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or discontinuance, the supplier shall have the burden of proving that it has acted in good faith, that the notice requirements under this section have been complied with, and that there was good cause for the amendment, modification, termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or discontinuance.
  3. Except as otherwise provided in this section, and in addition to the time limits set forth in subsection (4)(d) of this section, the supplier shall furnish written notice of the amendment, modification, termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or discontinuance of an agreement to the wholesaler not less than thirty (30) days before the effective date of the amendment, modification, termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or discontinuance. The notice shall be by certified mail and shall contain all of the following:
    1. A statement of intention to amend, modify, terminate, cancel, nonrenew or discontinue the agreement.
    2. A statement of the reason for the amendment, modification, termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or discontinuance.
    3. The date on which the amendment, modification, termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or discontinuance takes effect.
  4. Good cause shall exist for the purposes of a termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or discontinuance under subsection (1)(c) of this section when all of the following occur:
    1. There is a failure by the wholesaler to comply with a provision of the agreement which is both reasonable and of material significance to the business relationship between the wholesaler and the supplier.
    2. The supplier first acquired knowledge of the failure described in subparagraph (a) not more than twenty-four (24) months before the date notification was given pursuant to subsection (3) of this section.
    3. The wholesaler was given notice by the supplier of failure to comply with this agreement.
    4. The wholesaler has been afforded thirty (30) days in which to submit a plan of corrective action to comply with the agreement and an additional ninety (90) days to cure such noncompliance in accordance with the plan.
  5. Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (3) of this section, a supplier may terminate, cancel, fail to renew or discontinue an agreement immediately upon written notice given in the manner and containing the information required by subsection (3)(a)(b) and (c) of this section if any of the following occur:
    1. Insolvency of the wholesaler, the filing of any petition by or against the wholesaler under any bankruptcy or receivership law or the assignment for the benefit of creditors or dissolution or liquidation of the wholesaler which materially affects the wholesaler’s ability to remain in business.
    2. Revocation or suspension of the wholesaler’s state or federal license by the appropriate regulatory agency whereby the wholesaler cannot service the wholesaler’s sales territory for more than thirty-one (31) days.
    3. The wholesaler, or a partner or an individual who owns ten percent (10%) or more of the partnership or stock of a corporate wholesaler, has been convicted of a felony under the United States Code or the laws of any state which reasonably may adversely affect the good will or interest of the wholesaler or supplier. However, an existing stockholder or stockholders, or partner or partners, or a designated member or members, shall have, subject to the provisions of this chapter, the right to purchase the partnership interest or the stock of the offending partner or stockholder prior to the conviction of the offending partner or stockholder, and if the sale is completed prior to conviction the provisions of this subparagraph shall not apply.
    4. There was fraudulent conduct relating to a material matter on the part of the wholesaler in dealings with the supplier or its product, except that the supplier shall have the burden of proving fraudulent conduct relating to a material matter on the part of the wholesaler in any legal action challenging such termination.
    5. The wholesaler failed to confine to the designated sales territory its sales of a brand or brands to retailers except that this subsection does not apply if there is a dispute between two (2) or more wholesalers as to the boundaries of the assigned territory, and the boundaries cannot be determined by a reading of the description contained in the agreements between the supplier and the wholesalers.
    6. A wholesaler has failed to pay for light wine or beer ordered and delivered in accordance with established terms and the wholesaler fails to make full payment within five (5) business days after receipt of written notice of the delinquency and demand for immediate payment from the supplier.
    7. A wholesaler intentionally has made a transfer of wholesaler’s business, other than a transfer to a designated member without prior written notice to the supplier.
    8. A wholesaler intentionally has made a transfer of wholesaler’s business, other than a transfer to a designated member, although the wholesaler has prior to said transfer received from supplier a timely notice of disapproval of said transfer in accordance with this chapter.
    9. The wholesaler intentionally ceases to carry on business with respect to any of supplier’s brand or brands previously serviced by wholesaler in its territory designated by the supplier, unless such cessation is due to force majeure or to labor dispute and the wholesaler has made good faith efforts to overcome such events. Provided, however, this shall affect only that brand or brands with respect to which the wholesaler ceased to carry on business.
  6. Notwithstanding subsections (1), (3) and (5) of this section, a supplier may terminate, cancel, not renew or discontinue an agreement upon not less than thirty (30) days prior written notice if the supplier discontinues production or discontinues distribution in this state of all the brands sold by the supplier to the wholesaler, except that nothing in this section shall prohibit a supplier from: (a) upon not less than thirty (30) days notice, discontinuing the distribution of any particular brand or package of light wine or beer; or (b) conducting test marketing of a new brand of light wine or beer which is not currently being sold in this state, except that the supplier has notified the State Tax Commission in writing of its plans to test market, which notice shall describe the market area in which the test shall be conducted; the name or names of the wholesaler or wholesalers who will be selling the light wine or beer; the name or names of the brand of light wine or beer being tested; and the period of time, not to exceed eighteen (18) months, during which the testing will take place.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 6, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

§ 67-7-12. Successor supplier to become obligated to all terms and conditions of agreements between original supplier and wholesaler in effect on date of succession.

A successor shall become obligated to all of the terms and conditions of the agreement in effect on the date of succession. This section applies regardless of the character or form of the succession. A successor has the right to contractually require its wholesalers to comply with operational standards of performance if the standards are uniformly established for all the successor’s wholesalers and conform to the provisions of this chapter.

HISTORY: Laws, 2009, ch. 342, § 1, eff from and after passage (approved Mar. 16, 2009.).

Cross References —

Successor as used in this section defined, see §67-7-5

§ 67-7-13. Transfer of business and assignment of rights of wholesalers.

  1. Upon written notice of intent to transfer the wholesaler’s business, any individual owning or deceased individual who owned an interest in a wholesaler may transfer the wholesaler’s business to a designated member, or to any other person who meets the nondiscriminatory material and reasonable qualifications and standards required by the supplier for similarly situated wholesalers. The consent or approval of the supplier shall not be required of any transfer of the wholesaler’s business, including the assignment of the wholesaler’s rights under the agreement, to a designated member or shall not be withheld or unreasonably delayed to a proposed transferee who meets such nondiscriminatory, material and reasonable qualifications and standards. Such designated member or transferee shall in no event be qualified as a transferee, without the written approval or consent of the supplier, where such proposed transferee shall have been involved in the following:
    1. Insolvency, filing of any voluntary or involuntary petition under any bankruptcy or receivership law, or execution of any assignment for the benefit of creditors; or
    2. Revocation or suspension of a special occupational tax license by the regulatory agency of the United States Government or any state, whereby service was interrupted for more than thirty-one (31) days; or
    3. Conviction of the proposed transferee or any owner thereof of a felony under the United States Code or the laws of any state which reasonably may adversely affect the good will or interest of the wholesaler or supplier; or
    4. Had an agreement involuntarily terminated, cancelled, not renewed or discontinued by a supplier for good cause.
  2. The supplier shall not interfere with, prevent or unreasonably delay the transfer of the wholesaler’s business, including an assignment of wholesaler’s rights under the agreement, if the proposed transferee is a designated member, or if the transferee other than a designated member meets such nondiscriminatory, material and reasonable qualifications and standards required by the supplier for similarly situated wholesalers. Where the transferee is other than a designated member, the supplier may in good faith and for good cause related to the reasonable qualifications refuse to accept the transfer of the wholesaler’s business or the assignment of the wholesaler’s rights under the agreement.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 7, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Dismissal.

Circuit court erred in dismissing a wholesaler’s complaint for failure to state a claim because the wholesaler alleged that the Mississippi Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act rendered the match-and-redirect provision of the parties’ distribution contract null and void, and a beer supplier’s demands premised on the void provision could have amounted to unjustified “interference” with the wholesaler’s transfer to an allegedly qualified transferee. Rex Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 271 So.3d 445, 2019 Miss. LEXIS 205 (Miss. 2019).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

§ 67-7-15. Duty of supplier to compensate wholesaler for conduct resulting in diminished value of business; determination of compensation by arbitration.

  1. Except as provided for in this chapter, a supplier that has amended, modified, cancelled, terminated or refused to renew any agreement; or caused a wholesaler to resign from an agreement; or has interfered with, prevented or unreasonably delayed, or where required by this chapter, has withheld or unreasonably delayed consent to or approval of, any assignment or transfer of a wholesaler’s business, shall pay the wholesaler reasonable compensation for the diminished value of the wholesaler’s business, including any ancillary business which has been negatively affected by the act of the supplier. The value of the wholesaler’s business or ancillary business shall include, but not be limited to, its good will, except that nothing contained in this chapter shall give rise to a claim against the supplier or wholesaler by any proposed purchaser of wholesaler’s business.
  2. Should either party, at any time, determine that mutual agreement on the amount of reasonable compensation cannot be reached, the supplier or the wholesaler may send by certified mail, return receipt requested, written notice to the other party declaring its intention to proceed with arbitration. Arbitration shall proceed only by mutual agreement of both parties.
  3. Not more than ten (10) business days after the notice to enter into arbitration has been delivered, the other party shall send written notice to the requesting party declaring its intention either to proceed or not to proceed with arbitration. Should the other party fail to respond within ten (10) business days, it shall be conclusively presumed that said party shall have agreed to arbitration.
  4. The matter of determining the amount of compensation may, by agreement of the parties, be submitted to a three (3) member arbitration panel consisting of one (1) representative selected by the supplier but unassociated with the affected supplier; one (1) wholesaler representative selected by the wholesaler but unassociated with the wholesaler; and an impartial arbitrator.
  5. Not more than ten (10) business days after mutual agreement of both parties has been reached to arbitrate, each party shall designate, in writing, its one (1) arbitrator representative and the party initiating arbitration shall request, in writing, a list of five (5) arbitrators from the American Arbitration Association or its successor and request that the list be mailed to each party by certified mail, return receipt requested. Not more than ten (10) business days after the receipt of the list of five (5) choices, the wholesaler arbitrator and the supplier arbitrator shall strike and disqualify up to two (2) names each from the list. Should either party fail to respond within the ten (10) business days or should more than one (1) name remain after the strikes, the American Arbitration Association shall make the selection of the impartial arbitrator from the names not stricken from said list.
  6. Not more than thirty (30) days after the final selection of the arbitration panel is made, the arbitration panel shall convene to decide the dispute. The panel shall conclude the arbitration within twenty (20) days after the arbitration panel convenes and shall render a decision by majority vote of the arbitrators within twenty (20) days from the conclusion of the arbitration. The award of the arbitration panel shall be final and binding on the parties as to the amount of compensation for said diminished value.
  7. The cost of the impartial arbitrator, the stenographer and the meeting site shall be equally divided between the wholesaler and the supplier. All other costs shall be paid by the party incurring them.
  8. After both parties have agreed to arbitrate, should either party, except by mutual agreement, fail to abide by the time limitations as prescribed in subsections (3), (5) and (6) of this section, or fail or refuse to make the selection of any arbitrators, or fail to participate in the arbitration hearings, the other party shall make the selection of its arbitrators and proceed to arbitration. The party who has failed or refused to comply as prescribed in this section shall be considered to be in default. Any party considered to be in default pursuant to this subsection shall have waived any and all rights the party would have had in the arbitration and shall be considered to have consented to the determination of the arbitration panel.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 8, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Dismissal.

Circuit court erred in dismissing a wholesaler’s complaint for failure to state a claim because the wholesaler alleged that the Mississippi Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act rendered the match-and-redirect provision of the parties’ distribution contract null and void, and a beer supplier’s demands premised on the void provision could have amounted to unjustified “interference” with the wholesaler’s transfer to an allegedly qualified transferee. Rex Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 271 So.3d 445, 2019 Miss. LEXIS 205 (Miss. 2019).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

§ 67-7-17. Waiver of rights by wholesalers generally; good faith settlement of disputes.

A wholesaler may not waive any of the rights granted in any provision of this chapter and the provisions of any agreement which would have such an effect shall be null and void. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit or prohibit good faith dispute settlements voluntarily entered into by the parties.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 9, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Dismissal.

Circuit court erred in dismissing a wholesaler’s complaint for failure to state a claim because the wholesaler alleged that the Mississippi Beer Industry Fair Dealing Act rendered the match-and-redirect provision of the parties’ distribution contract null and void, and a beer supplier’s demands premised on the void provision could have amounted to unjustified “interference” with the wholesaler’s transfer to an allegedly qualified transferee. Rex Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC, 271 So.3d 445, 2019 Miss. LEXIS 205 (Miss. 2019).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

§ 67-7-19. Agreements subject to chapter; applicability of terms and conditions of transferred agreements.

  1. This chapter shall apply to agreements entered into or renewed after April 7, 1995.
  2. A transferee of a wholesaler that continues in business as a wholesaler shall have the benefit of and be bound by all terms and conditions of the agreement with the supplier in effect on the date of the transfer, except that a transfer of a wholesaler’s business which requires supplier’s consent or approval but is disapproved by the supplier shall be null and void.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 10, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

§ 67-7-21. Civil damage actions for violations of chapter; damages and costs recoverable; actions for declaratory and injunctive relief; venue.

  1. If a supplier or wholesaler engages in conduct prohibited under this chapter, either party may maintain a civil action against the other to recover actual damages reasonably incurred as the result of the prohibited conduct.
  2. A supplier or wholesaler that violates any provision of this chapter shall be liable for all actual damages and all court costs and, in the court’s discretion, reasonable attorney fees incurred by the other party as a result of that violation.
  3. A supplier or wholesaler may bring an action for declaratory judgment for determination of any controversy arising pursuant to this chapter.
  4. Upon proper application to the court, a supplier or wholesaler may obtain injunctive relief against any violation of this chapter.
  5. Any legal action taken under this chapter, or in a dispute over the provisions of an agreement shall be filed in a court, state or federal, located in Mississippi, which state court is located in, or which federal court has jurisdiction and venue of, the county in which the wholesaler maintains its principal place of business in this state.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 11, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

1. Private right of action.

State statutes regulating the relationship between suppliers and wholesalers of beer did not provide a private right of action for a retailer to allege that a distributor violated the regulations. Major Mart v. Mitchell Distrib. Co., 46 F. Supp. 3d 639, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122366 (S.D. Miss. 2014), dismissed, in part, — F. Supp. 3d —, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186640 (S.D. Miss. 2015).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

§ 67-7-23. Waiver of rights or causes of action.

No right or cause of action authorized by Mississippi law shall be waived by the supplier or wholesaler unless specifically waived in the agreement.

HISTORY: Laws, 1995, ch. 619, § 12, eff from and after passage (approved April 7, 1995).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 94 et seq.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 142 et seq.

Chapter 9. Possession or Transportation of Alcoholic Beverages, Light Wine, or Beer

§ 67-9-1. Transportation and possession of alcoholic beverages, light wine and beer by person holding an alcohol processing permit.

Notwithstanding the provisions of any section of Title 27 or 67, Mississippi Code of 1972, it shall be lawful for any person holding an alcohol processing permit to transport and possess alcoholic beverages, light wine and beer, in any part of the state, for his or her use in cooking, processing or manufacturing products which contain alcoholic beverages as an integral ingredient, in amounts as limited by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division of the State Tax Commission. The authority to transport and possess alcoholic beverages, light wine and beer under this section exists regardless of whether (a) the county or municipality in which the transportation or possession takes place has voted for or against coming out from under the dry law, or (b) the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt or manufacture of light wine and beer otherwise is prohibited.

The provisions of this section shall not be construed as amending, repealing or otherwise affecting any statute or any lawfully adopted ordinance, rule or regulation that prohibits or restricts the location at which, or the premises upon which, alcoholic beverages, light wine or beer may be sold or consumed.

HISTORY: Laws, 1996, ch. 417, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 1996.

Editor’s Notes —

Section 27-3-4 provides that the terms “‘Mississippi State Tax Commission,’ ‘State Tax Commission,’ ‘Tax Commission’ and ‘commission’ appearing in the laws of this state in connection with the performance of the duties and functions by the Mississippi State Tax Commission, the State Tax Commission or Tax Commission shall mean the Department of Revenue.”

Cross References —

Transportation of alcoholic beverages generally, see §27-71-15.

Exception to applicability of local option alcoholic beverage control law, see §67-1-7.

Prohibitions against possession of alcoholic beverages generally, see §67-1-9.

Local option election to render local option alcoholic beverage control law effective in county, see §§67-1-11,67-1-13.

Local option election to render local option alcoholic beverage control law effective in certain municipalities see §67-1-14.

Local option elections regarding light wines and beer in county, see §67-3-7.

Local option elections regarding light wines and beer in certain municipalities, see §67-3-9.

Prohibition against possession of light wine and beer in dry counties, see §67-3-13.

Interference with transportation of light wines and beer, §67-3-67.

Exception to prohibition against possession of light wine and beer in dry counties, see §67-7-13.

Unlawful transportation of intoxicating liquors, §97-31-47.

Transportation from without the state, see §97-31-47.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur.

45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors §§ 15, 28-44, 172, 188, 266, 270, 280, 296, 297, 302, 313, 323, 351, 377, 400-402, 406, 407, 409, 422, 428.

CJS.

48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors §§ 44, 142, 161, 162, 297, 298, 369-372.