Case ID: pa_90/html/0376-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Toole’s Appeal.
    To grant or refuse a license is entirely within the discretion of the Court of Quarter Sessions, and no appeal lies therefrom.
    May 27th 1879.
    Before Siiarswood, C. J., Mercur, Gordon, Paxson, Woodward, Trunkey and Sterrett, JJ.
    Certiorari to the Court of Quarter Sessions of Huntingdon county : Of May Term 1879, No. 187.
    Eelix Toole petitioned the court for a license to keep a tavern or inn, and filed his bond and recommendations, and fully complied with all the requirements of the Act of April 12th 1875, Purd. Dig. 2027, and the rules of court. Twenty citizens signed the recommendation attached to his petition. There was. no remonstrance or objection of any kind to the granting of the license. The court, however, refused the license, and when asked to state their reasons, declined to do so.
    Toole then took this writ, and assigned this refusal for error.
    
      Petrilcen McNeil, for plaintiff in error.
    The clear intention of the Act of Assembly is that the court should exercise a sound judicial discretion in the granting of license, when objection was made to the granting of any particular license, and that discretion was to be exercised on the evidence before the court. There would or could be nothing else upon which to call into exercise or rest a legal or judicial discretion. .
    No counsel contra.
    
    June 9th 1879,
   The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered,

Per Curiam.

_ _ . Thi's was an application in the court below for a tavern license. The Act of Assembly gives no appeal in such a case. .'The grant o’r- refusal’ of a license is entirely within the discretion of the court. On the face of the record, we see no evidence-of the’abuse of the discretion. What testimony may have been before the court, does not appear, and we are certainly not to presume that the refusal of the license was arbitrary and without some good reason.

Order approved.