Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 3-8-1 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 3-8-1 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 3-8-1

TITLE 3 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES

Section 8. Sale of Alcoholic Beverages at Publicly Owned Facilities, 3-8-1 through 3-8-6.

ARTICLE 4 LOCAL EXCISE TAXATION

3-8-1. Regulation and taxation of sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages at airports owned or operated by counties or municipalities.

  1. The issuance of licenses for the package sale, sale by the drink, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages within the boundaries of any airport owned or operated, or both, by a county or municipality may be approved by a proper resolution or ordinance of the county or municipal governing authority owning or operating the airport. A license for such sales, storage, and distribution of distilled spirits may be issued only by the governing authority of a municipality or county in which the sale of alcoholic beverages is lawful.
  2. This Code section shall apply regardless of the location of the airport.
  3. For the purposes of regulating the sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages, but not for the purposes of taxation, the airport boundaries of an airport owned or operated, or both, by a county or municipality shall be treated:
    1. If the airport is owned or operated, or both, by a county, as though the airport boundaries were located entirely within the boundaries of the county which owns or operates, or owns and operates, the airport; or
    2. If the airport is owned or operated, or both, by a municipality, as though the airport boundaries were located entirely within the corporate limits of that municipality and entirely within the boundaries of the county in which the greater portion of the municipality owning or operating, or owning and operating, the airport lies.
  4. No county or municipality may control, license, regulate, or exercise police powers over the sale, storage, or distribution of alcoholic beverages within the boundaries of an airport owned or operated, or both, by another municipality or county which has lawfully approved the sale in any fashion or storage of any alcoholic beverages within all or part of the municipality or county.
  5. The county or municipality authorized by law to impose and collect taxes on the sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages at the airport may impose and collect such taxes, unaffected by this Code section; and the county or municipality owning or operating, or both, the airport shall not impose or collect such taxes. The proceeds of the taxes which the county and the municipality are authorized by law to impose and collect on the sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages at the airport shall be equally divided between the county and the municipality.
  6. The county or municipality which issues the license pursuant to subsection (a) of this Code section may impose, collect, and receive licensing fees generally paid in connection with the licensing of the sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages; and any county or municipality that would, apart from this Code section, otherwise license or regulate, or both, the sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages at the airport shall not impose or receive any such licensing fees unless it is the county or municipality issuing the license.

(Ga. L. 1968, p. 1441, § 1; Ga. L. 1968, p. 1443, § 1; Code 1933, § 58-828, enacted by Ga. L. 1977, p. 1316, § 1; Ga. L. 1980, p. 501, § 1; Code 1933, § 5A-6501, enacted by Ga. L. 1980, p. 1573, § 1; Ga. L. 1983, p. 759, § 1.)

Cross references.

- Construction and regulation of airports generally, T. 6, C. 3.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Entitlement to taxes between municipalities.

- Trial court granted an impermissible advisory opinion when the court granted a second city's request for a declaratory judgment that the second city was authorized to impose and collect taxes on the sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages at an airport within that city's limits because the second city failed to show that there was any justiciable controversy; the first city conceded that, under Georgia's Alcoholic Beverages Code, O.C.G.A. § 3-8-1 et seq., only the second city was authorized to impose and collect taxes on the sale, storage, and distribution of alcoholic beverages at the airport within the city's limits and that the first city had to refund any alcoholic beverage taxes that the city received in error for the sale, storage, and distribution of alcohol in portions of the airport located within the corporate boundaries of the second city. City of Atlanta v. City of College Park, 311 Ga. App. 62, 715 S.E.2d 158 (2011).

Applicability of sovereign immunity to action between city and county.

- In a suit by a city against a county, seeking a portion of tax revenue raised by the county from alcoholic beverage sales, there was a threshold question of whether sovereign immunity applied in suits between political subdivisions of the same sovereign (such as the city and the county), which the trial court had not addressed; therefore, remand was required. Clayton County v. City of College Park, 301 Ga. 653, 803 S.E.2d 63 (2017).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors, §§ 221 et seq., 400, 415, 418, 514.

Cases Citing Georgia Code 3-8-1 From Courtlistener.com

Total Results: 15

City of Coll. Park v. Clayton Cnty.

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-06-24

Citation: 830 S.E.2d 179, 306 Ga. 301

Snippet: asserts that since the 1983 enactment of OCGA § 3-8-1 (regulation and taxation of alcoholic beverages

Bellsouth Telecomms., LLC v. Cobb Cnty.

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-02-18

Citation: 824 S.E.2d 233, 305 Ga. 144

Snippet: alcoholic beverages at the airport, see OCGA § 3-8-1. But as **155explained above, our decision in that

In re Caldwell

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2018-05-21

Citation: 814 S.E.2d 674

Snippet: sanction for a single violation of Rule 1.2, 1.3, 8.1, or 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, and the maximum

In re Garcia

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2018-04-16

Citation: 813 S.E.2d 591

Snippet: maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 8.1, or 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, and the maximum

Clayton County v. City of College Park

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-06-30

Citation: 301 Ga. 653, 803 S.E.2d 63, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 553, 2017 WL 2822465

Snippet: asserts that since the 1983 enactment of OCGA § 3-8-1 (regulation and taxation of alcoholic beverages

In re Berlon

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-06-16

Citation: 295 Ga. 361, 759 S.E.2d 866, 2014 Fulton County D. Rep. 1518, 2014 WL 2718810, 2014 Ga. LEXIS 501

Snippet: maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 8.1, and 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, and the maximum

in the Matter of Michael Rene' Berlon

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-06-16

Snippet: maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 8.1, and 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, and the maximum

In re Murray

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-03-28

Citation: 295 Ga. 71, 757 S.E.2d 134, 2014 Fulton County D. Rep. 693, 2014 WL 1266265, 2014 Ga. LEXIS 257

Snippet: correct that Murray’s violations of Rules 1.1,1.2,1.3, 8.1 and 8.4 may be punished by disbarment. Moreover

in the Matter of Edward T. Murray

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-03-28

Snippet: that Murray’s violations of Rules 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 8.1 and 8.4 may be punished by disbarment. Moreover

In re Proctor

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2013-03-18

Citation: 292 Ga. 643, 740 S.E.2d 168, 2013 Fulton County D. Rep. 613, 2013 WL 1092712, 2013 Ga. LEXIS 264

Snippet: he violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.16 (d), 3.5 (c), 5.3, 8.1, 8.4 (a) (4) and 9.3 of the Georgia Rules of Professional

In re Davis

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2012-02-27

Citation: 290 Ga. 857, 725 S.E.2d 216, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 575, 2012 WL 603273, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 212

Snippet: maximum punishment for a single violation of Rules 1.3, 8.1 or 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, while a single violation

Haley v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2011-07-08

Citation: 712 S.E.2d 838, 289 Ga. 515, 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 2179, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 556

Snippet: 672 S.E.2d 522 (punctuation omitted). OCGA § 35-3-8.1 authorizes state or local officials to request the

In Re Warnock

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2011-06-27

Citation: 711 S.E.2d 726, 289 Ga. 456, 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 1932, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 510

Snippet: maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 8.1 and 8.4(a)(4) is disbarment and the maximum sanction

Diverse Power, Inc. v. Jackson

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2009-04-28

Citation: 676 S.E.2d 204, 285 Ga. 340, 2009 Fulton County D. Rep. 1482, 2009 Ga. LEXIS 161

Snippet: the date of the Notice of Intent to Award." GVM § 3.8(1)(b)(i). Roughly one month later, Diverse Power sued

Owens v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1983-06-30

Citation: 305 S.E.2d 102, 251 Ga. 313

Snippet: 92A-302. OCGA § 35-3-13. Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, OCGA § 35-3-8.1 (Code Ann. § 92A-304.2) specifically permits sheriffs