Court Opinion

ID: 9684259
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:52:14.164854+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:54.475609
License: Public Domain

STEPHENSON, Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent. I would affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The City of Beaumont is a home rule city, and it is conceded by everyone that a home rule city now has all of the power not denied to it by the Constitution and statutes. Therefore, the question before this court is not whether the City of Beaumont *451had been granted the specific power to limit the number of hours a package store may remain open, but whether or not that specific power has been denied to the City of Beaumont.
The majority opinion gives two grounds for arriving at the conclusion that such specific power has been denied the City. First, the majority find the City has been denied that authority through the negative conclusion that certain statutes quoted authorize the City to exercise certain control and the authority to limit the hours is not expressed. In view of the established law in this,State that a home rule city is authorized to do anything not specifically denied to it, the rule expressio unius est exclusio alterius cannot be used. No case in Texas that has been cited to us, or that I have found, has ever used that rule to detract from the authority of a home rule city.
The second ground, given by the majority for finding the City has been denied the specific power to limit the hours a package store can remain open, is that the City Ordinance conflicts with or is inconsistent with the statute. I find no such conflict or inconsistency. The statute says, in effect, that no person may sell or deliver alcoholic beverages during certain hours of the day. The City Ordinance does not say that a person in the City of Beaumont may sell or deliver alcoholic beverages during those prohibited hours. If it did, then there would be a conflict and inconsistency. For the majority to arrive at a conflict, it first has to find that a statute saying a person cannot sell or deliver during certain hours means that sales or deliveries can be made at all other hours. I do not find that to be a reasonable construction. If the Legislature had intended to give persons with this license the direct authority to remain open for specific hours, then it would have been a simple matter to say so.
I am convinced the City of Beaumont is in the best position to determine when and how it can enforce the laws relating to the use of alcoholic beverages, and set the hours a package store may remain open. That power has not been denied to the City by the statutes in question.