(1) The commission shall set for hearing before it any application for a retail license, bottle club license, craft brewery license, or microdistillery license relative to which it has received:
(a) Within forty-five days after the date of receipt of such application by the city, village, or county clerk, a recommendation of denial from the city, village, or county;
(b) Within ten days after the receipt of a recommendation from the city, village, or county, or, if no recommendation is received, within forty-five days after the date of receipt of such application by the city, village, or county clerk, objections in writing by not less than three persons residing within such city, village, or county, protesting the issuance of the license. Withdrawal of the protest does not prohibit the commission from conducting a hearing based upon the protest as originally filed and making an independent finding as to whether the license should or should not be issued;
(c) Within forty-five days after the date of receipt of such application by the city, village, or county clerk, objections by the commission or any duly appointed employee of the commission, protesting the issuance of the license; or
(d) An indication on the application that the location of a proposed retail or bottle club establishment is within one hundred fifty feet of a church as described in subsection (2) of section 53-177 and a written request by the church for a hearing.
(2) Hearings upon such applications shall be in the following manner: Notice indicating the time and place of such hearing shall be mailed or electronically delivered to the applicant, the local governing body, each individual protesting a license pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of this section, and any church affected as described in subdivision (1)(d) of this section, at least fifteen days prior to such hearing. The notice shall state that the commission will receive evidence for the purpose of determining whether to approve or deny the application. Mailing or electronic delivery to the attorney of record of a party shall be deemed to fulfill the purposes of this section. The commission may receive evidence, including testimony and documentary evidence, and may hear and question witnesses concerning the application. The commission shall not use electronic delivery with respect to an applicant, a protestor, or a church under this section without the consent of the recipient to electronic delivery.
Notes of Decisions
City of Lincoln v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm'n, 626 N.W.2d 518 (Neb. 2001).
· cites it 6× “The city council’s recommendation for denial triggered the requirement in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133 (Reissue 1984) for a hearing before the Commission.”
Gas 'N Shop, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm'n, 492 N.W.2d 7 (Neb. 1992).
· cites it 4× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133 (Reissue 1984) required a hearing on the application if, among other things, the city recommended denial of the license or at least three persons residing within the city protested issuance of the license.”
Kozal v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 297 Neb. 938 (Neb. 2017).
· cites it 2× “Thus, it defines which parties are “parties of record” that must be included in the district court’s APA review of the Commission’s proceedings. [15-17] When interpreting a statute, the starting point and focus of the inquiry is the meaning of the statutory lan- guage,…”
Retroactive, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 298 Neb. 936 (Neb. 2018).
· cites it 4× “On December 17, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133 (Cum. Supp. 2016), the Commission conducted a hearing on the application, and on January 8, 2016, the Commission entered an order denying the application.”
Candyland, LLC v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 306 Neb. 169 (Neb. 2020).
· cites it 4× “pplication for a retail, bottle club, craft brewery, or microdistillery license: (i) The applicant; (ii) Each individual protesting the issuance of such license pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 53-133; (iii) The local governing body if it is entering an appearance to…”
Hadlock v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm'n, 228 N.W.2d 887 (Neb. 1975).
· cites it 8× “1943, which provides: “Except as provided in subsection (1) of section 53-133, upon the expiration of thirty days from the date of mailing notice, as provided in section 53-131, the commission shall cause a retail license to be signed by its chairman, attested by its secretary…”
J K & J, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm'n, 231 N.W.2d 694 (Neb. 1975).
· cites it 6× “As required by section 53-133, R. R. S. 1943, the commission then set the application for hearing and gave notice to the applicant of the time and place.”
Kwik Shop, Inc. v. City of Lincoln, 498 N.W.2d 102 (Neb. 1993).
· cites it 2× “(3) In making its determination pursuant to subsection (2) of this section the commission shall consider: (a) The recommendation of the local governing body; (b) The existence of a citizens’ protest made in accordance with section 53-133; (c) The existing population of the city .”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133(1)(b) — 3 cases
Kozal v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 297 Neb. 938 (Neb. 2017).
“Thus, it defines which parties are “parties of record” that must be included in the district court’s APA review of the Commission’s proceedings. [15-17] When interpreting a statute, the starting point and focus of the inquiry is the meaning of the statutory lan- guage,…”
Retroactive, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 298 Neb. 936 (Neb. 2018).
“On December 17, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133 (Cum. Supp. 2016), the Commission conducted a hearing on the application, and on January 8, 2016, the Commission entered an order denying the application.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133(1)(c) — 2 cases
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133(1)(h) — 1 case
Kozal v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 297 Neb. 938 (Neb. 2017).
“Thus, it defines which parties are “parties of record” that must be included in the district court’s APA review of the Commission’s proceedings. [15-17] When interpreting a statute, the starting point and focus of the inquiry is the meaning of the statutory lan- guage,…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 53-133(l)(c) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.