AINSWORTH v. OLCC, 55 Or. App. 259 (1981)

637 P.2d 936


CA A20119Oregon Court of Appeals.Argued August 26, 1981.
December 21, 1981.

Judicial Review from Liquor Control Commission.

David V. Gilstrap, Ashland, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Davis, Ainsworth, Pinnock Davis, P.C., Ashland.

Rudolph S. Westerband, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent Oregon Liquor Control Commission. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and William F. Gary, Solicitor General, Salem.

Michael D. Henderson, Grants Pass, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent Michael D. Henderson, pro se.

Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Thornton and Van Hoomissen, Judges.

Page 260


Petitioner seeks judicial review of an order of respondent Oregon Liquor Control Commission adopting the hearings officer’s findings and conclusions and granting respondent Michael Henderson, dba Murphy’s Tavern, a Retail Malt Beverage License. We have examined each of petitioner’s five contentions as provided for in ORS 183.482(7)-(8) and find no reversible error.

As we said in Wheeler v. OLCC, 28 Or. App. 455, 559 P.2d 1328
(1977), we do not substitute our judgment of the evidence for that of the commission. Although a reviewing court may disagree with conclusions drawn by the commission, the court is bound to uphold its order where it is supported by substantial evidence Accord: Haviland Hotels v. OLCC, 20 Or. App. 120, 530 P.2d 1263
(1975). Where none of the grounds enumerated in ORS 183.482(7)-(8) are shown on review, and where a rational basis existed for the commission’s order, there is nothing more for this court to review.


Page 261