Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Bartlett v. Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided February 23, 1996No. 1940558Published

1ConcurrenceHouston, Justice

To me, the meaning of the constitutional prohibition “nor shall the state be interested in any private or corporate enterprise” hinges on the words “[to] be interested in,” “private,” and “corporate,” rather than on the word “enterprise.”

I concede that an “enterprise” is “[a] business venture or undertaking.” Black’s Law Dictionary 531 (6th ed. 1991). I concede that the sale of liquor and wine at retail for off-premises consumption is an enterprise. I concede that “ ‘the state [had] the right and power to provide for the sale of intoxicating liquors solely through state stores,’ ” Bartlett v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Wilkinson v. MurphySupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  2. Bolton v. White Motor Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1940
  3. Van Hart v. deGRAFFENRIEDSupreme Court of Alabama · 1980
  4. Sims v. RussellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
  5. Bartlett v. Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control BoardCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API