Ruling may again halt Sheetz beer sales

Ruling may again halt Sheetz beer sales

	Published : Tue, 03 Apr 2007 20:36 By : Agencies Print this Story

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) - Beer sales at a Sheetz Inc. convenience store building in Altoona may soon be suspended again, because a state judge ruled that sales cannot continue while an appeal is pending.

Commonwealth Court Judge Robert E. Simpson issued an order filed Tuesday that keeps the court's previous decision in force.

The court had determined that Sheetz's beer-sales license requires it to allow beer to be consumed on the premises, something Sheetz does not allow patrons to do.

The Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, which issued the license to Sheetz, appealed the ruling to the state Supreme Court, and Sheetz had resumed selling beer in late February while that appeal was pending.

'We wanted Sheetz not to be able to sell beer in the way that it wanted to sell beer,' said Bob Hoffman, attorney for the Malt Beverage Distributors Association of Pennsylvania, which represents retailers that sell beer by the case or keg. 'It's really just a question from our perspective of a court order taking effect while it's on appeal.'

Sheetz vice president and general counsel Mike Cortez declined comment Tuesday on the latest court decision.

The company could attempt to comply with the Commonwealth Court ruling by allowing beer drinking inside the Altoona restaurant, which is connected to a convenience store and gas station.

Simpson said the public interest was better served by keeping the Commonwealth Court ruling in place until the state Supreme Court rules.

'Although Sheetz asserts it may lose revenue if it cannot conduct takeout sales ... this loss of revenue, when weighed against the potential damage to MBDA members, is not substantial,' Simpson wrote.

The Liquor Control Board said in a statement that it was reviewing the opinion and had not decided whether to ask the Supreme Court to reinstate the stay.

In a court document filed three weeks ago, the LCB said it was not sure how to apply the Commonwealth Court's 4-3 ruling that retail-dispenser licenses require some drinking on the premises.

'The extent of this duty is unclear,' wrote LCB lawyer Rodrigo J. Diaz. 'Is there a minimum amount that must be sold? Is it sufficient for a licensee to merely offer beer for on-premises consumption? Must a certain percentage of a retail dispenser's beer sales be for on-premises consumption?'

The Supreme Court has not indicated whether it will take the case.