Findings Of Fact Respondent is the holder of Beverage License No. 26-150, Series 2-COP, allowing the consumption of alcoholic beverages on the premises, located at 5212 Heckscher Drive, Jacksonville, Florida. This beverage license was previously held by Respondent's husband, Glenn F. Rodgers, and brother-in-law Don E. Rodgers. Following their felony convictions, the Rodgers brothers agreed by stipulation signed on February 19, 1979, to divest themselves of all interest in the licensed operation. This stipulation was incorporated in Petitioner's Order signed April 3, 1979, which directed transfer of the license to a qualified applicant. Mary J. Rodgers applied for the transfer of said beverage license and included an affidavit filed with Petitioner on February 14, 1979, averring that she was purchasing the business from her husband and brother-in-law and would be the only person with any interest, direct or indirect, in the business. In reliance on this statement and the stipulation, Petitioner transferred the beverage license to Respondent. During an undercover inspection at Brown's Creek Fish Camp on June 6, 1980, beverage officers observed Respondent's husband, Glenn F. Rodgers, working on the licensed premises. On a June 27, 1980, follow-up inspection, beverage officers observed him giving instructions to a waitress. In a casual conversation, Glenn Rodgers told Beverage Officer Cunningham that the business was his and that he had owned it for three years. During Glenn F. Rodgers' prison work-release parole in 1980, he worked full-time at Brown's Creek Fish Camp. He is now employed in a construction job, but continues to work in the licensed premises on a part-time basis. Following the June premises inspections, Petitioner investigated Respondent's business relationships end discovered that the lease agreement on the property housing the licensed premises remained in the names of Glenn F. end Don E. Rodgers. When the Rodgers brothers originally purchased the business they co-signed a Small Business Administration loan for $30,000 and a promissory note to the prior owners for $10,000. Their names also remain on these business loans. Respondent paid $3,000 for the business, and makes lease and lean payments. She has not, however, assumed the underlying obligations to the lenders. Records of the Lake Forest Atlantic Bank, where Respondent conducts her banking, revealed that an account was opened on May 4, 1977, under the names of Glenn F. end Don B. Rodgers, a general partnership. The name of Mary J. Rodgers was added to the signature card on January 18, 1979, and on the date of the hearing, all three names remained on the account records. By late-filed exhibit, Respondent demonstrated that the bank account has now been transferred to her. Respondent's business records include invoices from the Eli Witt Company, Post Office Box 6887, Jacksonville, Florida. An Eli Witt receipt dated July 18, 1980, for supplies delivered to Brown's Creek Fish Camp carries the signature of Glenn Rodgers, Respondent's husband. North Florida Premium Finance Company and the Robert S. Shute, Inc. Insurance Agency records reveal that Glenn F. Rodgers also signed for the financing of business insurance policies issued to Mary O. Rodgers d/b/a Brown's Creek Fish Camp for the policy period June, 1980 to June, 1981.
Recommendation From the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent be found guilty of failure to disclose the interest of Glenn F. Rodgers at the time of making application for a beverage license in violation of Section 861.17, Florida Statutes (1979. It is further RECOMMENDED that Respondent be found guilty of failure to comply with Petitioner's Administrative Order directing divestment by Glenn F. Rodgers of any interest in operation of the licensed premises. It is further RECOMMENDED that Beverage License No. 26-150, Series 2-COP, held by Mary J. Rodgers, be revoked. DONE and ENTERED this 27th day of May, 1981, in Tallahassee, Florida. R. T. CARPENTER, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 27th day of May, 1981. COPIES FURNISHED: James N. Watson, Jr., Esquire Department of Business Regulation 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Donald G. Nichols, Esquire Post Office Box 40011 Jacksonville, Florida 32203
The Issue Whether or not on or about November 1, 1976, Stella Lee Hill, licensed under the beverage laws, and/or her agent, servant, or employee, to-wit: Jacob Hill, did sell or cause to be sold or delivered intoxicating liquors, wines, or beer to-wit: one-half pint labeled Seagrams Extra Dry Gin, in Santa Rosa County, that which has voted against the sale of such intoxicating liquors, wines or beer, contrary to Section 568.02, F.S.
Findings Of Fact Stella Lee Hill is the holder of license no. 67-129, series 1-COP, held with the State of Florida, Division of Beverage. Stella Lee Hill has held this license from October 1, 1976, up to and including the date of hearing. This license is held to operate at Munson Highway, Route 6, Box 190, Milton, Florida, and to trade as Vonnie Branch Tip Inn, the trade name of the licensed premises. A series 1-COP license is a license which entitles the licensee to make beer sales for consumption on the premises. Santa Rosa County, Florida through its voters has determined that only beer may be sold in that county, of a weight 3.2% alcoholic content. No other form of alcoholic beverages may be sold in Santa Rosa County. On November 1, 1976, around 7:00 p.m., Central Standard Time, agent Roy Cotton, of the State of Florida, Division of Beverage met with an undercover agent, one Robert Lewis. Robert Lewis was not shown to be a member of any law enforcement agency. The meeting took place on the east side of Milton, Florida, in an open field. At that time a discussion was entered into between Cotton and Lewis on the subject of making an alcoholic beverage purchase of unauthorized alcoholic beverages, at the Respondent's licensed premises. Cotton search Lewis to make sure that he did not have any money or alcoholic beverages on his person and also search Lewis' automobile to insure that no alcoholic beverage was in that automobile. After making such search, Cotton provided Lewis with $5.00 in United States currency to make the aforementioned purchase. Lewis drove to the licensed premises in one automobile and Cotton in another. Cotton stationed himself so that he could see the licensed premises and the surrounding buildings, but did not go in the licensed premises. Lewis entered the licensed premises and while in the licensed premises spoke with the brother of the licensee, one Jacob Hill and asked for a half pint bottle of liquor. Jacob Hill left the licensed premises and went to an adjacent house which was the home of the mother of the licensee and returned to the licensed premises and presented Lewis with a one half pint bottle of Seagrams Extra Dry Gin. Lewis paid Jacob Hill for the half pint bottle of Seagrams Extra Dry Gin, a liquor containing more than 3.2% alcohol by weight, and left the premises. This sale was consummated in the presence of Stella Lee Hill, the licensee. The facts as established, show that intoxicating liquors were sold by an agent of the Respondent, to-wit: Jacob Hill, in a county where the voters had decided against the sale of specific intoxicating liquors. Therefore, the Respondent has violated Section 568.02, F.S.
Recommendation It is recommended that the license no. 67-129, series 1-COP, held by the Respondent, Stella Lee Hill, be suspended for a period of 30 days. DONE AND ENTERED this 13th day of June 1977 in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings 530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Charles T. Collett, Esquire Division of Beverage The Johns Building 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Stella Lee Hill Munson Highway Route 6, Box 190 Milton, Florida
The Issue Whether or not on or about October 31, 1975, the Respondents, Bossie Mae and Willie Mae Browdy, licensed under the beverage laws as a package store, and/or their agent, servant or employee, to wit: Bossie Mae Browdy did allow or permit the consumption of alcoholic beverages on their licensed premises, contrary to Rule 7A-3.05, Florida Administrative Code. Whether or not on or about November 1, 1975, the Respondents, Bossie Mae and Willie Mae Browdy, licensed under the beverage laws as Browdy's Mini Market with a 2-APS license to wit: Bossie Mae Browdy did allow gambling (card) on the licensed premises, contrary to Section 849.08, Florida Statutes and in violation of Section 561.29, Florida Statutes.
Findings Of Fact At present, and on October 31, 1975 and November 1, 1975, the Respondents, Bossie Mae and Willie Mae Browdy are and were the holders of a beverage license with the State of Florida, Division of Beverage number 69-299, 2-APS. On October 31, 1975, Eugene Fogel, a Division of Beverage enforcement officer entered the premises licensed by the State of Florida, Division of Beverage, which was operated by the Respondents at Avenue B on Chuluota Road, Oviedo, Florida. While in the store he observed an unknown black female consuming a beverage which was marked Millers High-Life. This consumption was taking place in the presence of the Respondent, Bossie Mae Browdy, and in the course of the consumption a conversation was taking place between the unknown black female and Bossie Mae Browdy. The bottle which Officer Fogel observed was marked with identifying information which the officer based upon his experience, felt indicated that it contained an alcoholic beverage. On November 1, 1975, officer Fogel returned to the licensed premises of the Respondents and entered into a card game in a porch like area which is immediately at the front of the store and connected to the store. This card game was between Fogel and several black males who were participating in a card game when he approached. The game took place over 45 minutes and money was exchanged at 25 cents a game for the winner, for a total amount of approximately $2.00. During the course of the game, Bossie Mae Browdy came to the door and looked out at the card game being played.
Recommendation It is recommended that the Respondents, Bossie Mae and Willie Mae Browdy, be fined in the amount of $100 for the offense as established through this administrative complaint. DONE and ENTERED this 24th day of November, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Charles Curtis, Esquire Division of Beverage The Johns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Carl Thompson, Esquire 25 South Magnolia Avenue Orlando, Florida 32801
Recommendation Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law recited above, it is recommended that respondent's license number 42-55 be revoked. Respectfully submitted and entered this 27th day of February, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida. DIANE D. TREMOR, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Mr. C.A. Nuzum Director Division of Beverage 210 Johns Building Tallahassee, Florida Mr. Charles F. Tunnicliff Department of Business Regulation 725 S. Bronough Street Room 210, Johns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. White Route 2, Box 13B Marianna, Florida 32446
The Issue The issues in these cases are whether Respondent, Club Manhattan Bar and Grill, LLC, d/b/a Club Manhattan Bar and Grill (Respondent), committed the acts alleged in the administrative complaints dated September 13, 2010, and December 1, 2010, and, if so, what disciplinary action, if any, should be taken against Respondent.
Findings Of Fact The Department is the state agency charged with the responsibility of regulating persons holding alcoholic beverage licenses. § 561.02, Fla. Stat. Respondent is licensed under the Florida beverage law by the Department. Respondent holds a 4COP/SRX special restaurant license issued by the Department with Alcoholic Beverage License No. 68-04347. Ms. Stokes is the licensee of record for Respondent. Consequently, Respondent is subject to the Department's regulatory jurisdiction. Respondent's series 4COP/SRX is a special restaurant license that permits it to sell beer, wine, and liquor for consumption on the licensed premises. Additionally, the licensee must satisfy seating and record-keeping requirements and must comply with 51 percent of its gross sales being food and non- alcoholic beverages. See § 561.20(2)(a)4., Fla. Stat. Respondent's restaurant is located in Sarasota County, Florida, and, pursuant to the 4COP/SRX license, must have seating and capability to serve 150 customers at any one time. On August 5, 2010, Special Agent Flynn conducted an inspection of Respondent's business premises. He conducted the inspection based on complaints made to the Department that Respondent was operating as an after-hours bar, rather than a restaurant. At this initial inspection, which occurred at 2:30 p.m. on August 5, 2010, Special Agent Flynn found the restaurant did not have any customers or menus. Further, he noticed that the premises had seating for only 92 people and a large dance floor. Further, he observed that the walls had signs advertising drink specials and late-night parties. Special Agent Flynn met Ms. Stokes, Respondent's manager and holder of the license, and informed her that the beverage license required that Respondent be able to serve 150 customers at one time. Also, Special Agent Flynn requested the required business records concerning the purchase of alcoholic beverage invoices from the distributors for a 60-day proceeding period. Ms. Stokes did not have the requested records on the premises. On August 19, 2010, Special Agent Flynn sent Ms. Stokes a written request, requesting alcoholic purchase invoices for a 60-day period before August 19, 2010. The request allowed Ms. Stokes 14 days to compile the records and to provide the records to the Department. The record here showed by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent did not produce records for the audit period. On September 8, 2010, at approximately 3:00 p.m., Special Agent Flynn returned to Respondent's premises. Again, he found that Respondent did not have the required seating number and ability to serve 150 customers at one time. Special Agent Flynn offered credible testimony that, during the September 8, 2010, inspection, he found Respondent had only 106 available seats. Further, consistent with his inspection on August 5, 2010, Special Agent Flynn observed facts showing that Respondent was a late-night bar, as opposed to a restaurant. The evidence showed that on September 8, 2010, Special Agent Flynn observed that Respondent did not have any customers, menus, and very little food in its small kitchen. Special Agent Flynn, however, did observe that Respondent continued to have its large dance floor, disc jockey booth, advertised drink specials, and posters advertising late-night parties. Clearly, Respondent was being operated as a bar, rather than a restaurant as required by its license. At the September 8, 2010, inspection, Special Agent Flynn again requested Respondent's business records that he had previously requested for the 60-day time period before August 19, 2010. Ms. Stokes provided a few invoices for purchases of food and non-alcoholic beverages. These invoices were dated after the August 19, 2010, date that Special Agent Flynn had requested and did not cover the requested 60 days prior to the August 19, 2010, request. These records included food and beverage purchases by Respondent from retailers, but did not contain any records concerning the points of sale at the restaurant. Ms. Nadeau, an auditor for the Department, offered credible testimony concerning the Department's request for business records from Respondent for the audit period of April 1, 2010, through July 31, 2010. On August 27, 2010, Ms. Nadeau set up an audit request for the period of April 1, 2010, through July 31, 2010, based on information provided by Special Agent Flynn. The Department provided Ms. Stokes with an audit engagement letter that requested business records. Ms. Nadeau testified that on September 10, 2010, she was contacted by Ms. Stokes. Ms. Stokes informed Ms. Nadeau that Ms. Stokes had become the owner of the restaurant in June 2010 and that she did not have the required records. Ms. Nadeau informed Ms. Stokes to provide all the records requested in the audit engagement letter that Ms. Stokes had and to try to obtain the prior records from the previous managing member of Respondent. On September 22, 2010, Ms. Stokes mailed to the Department records she claimed met the audit period. The records consisted of guest checks for July and August 2010, which only showed food purchases and no alcoholic beverage purchases. Further, Ms. Nadeau found that the records were not reliable, because the records contained numerous personal items not related to the restaurant, such as baby wipes, cotton swabs, and boxer shorts. Consequently, the record clearly and convincingly shows that Respondent failed to provide the required business records for the audit period of April 1, 2010, through July 31, 2010. Next, based on Respondent's failure to provide any reliable records, the Department was unable to conduct an audit of the business. Records provided by Respondent indicated that the only sales that occurred on the premises were for food. However, the testimony showed that Respondent's business included the sale of alcohol and marketed the sale of alcoholic beverages for late-night parties. Mr. Torres, the senior auditor for the Department, credibly testified that he conducted an independent review of Ms. Nadeau's initial audit findings. Mr. Torres, who has been employed with the Department for 27 years, reviewed the records provided by Respondent. He credibly testified that Respondent's guest checks were very questionable because they showed all food sales, but no alcohol, which was not consistent with Special Agent Flynn's observations. The evidence further showed that Ms. Stokes became the managing member of Respondent in June 2010. Ms. Stokes provided the Department with a change of corporate officers and named herself as registered agent, rather than apply for a new license. This distinction would later become important because, as explained by Ms. Nadeau, in the Department's eyes, there is a continuation of ownership. Under a continuation of ownership, Ms. Stokes was required to have business records for the time period before she became the managing member of Respondent. Ms. Stokes credibly testified that she did not have any records before June 20, 2010; thus, Respondent was unable to provide records for the audit period. Ms. Stokes candidly admitted that her restaurant had been struggling financially, which is why she had worked to catering special events to draw foot traffic.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, enter a final order revoking Respondent's alcoholic beverage license and finding that Respondent violated: 1. Section 561.20(2)(a)4., within section 561.29(1)(a), on September 8, 2010, by failing to provide the required service area, seating, and equipment to serve 150 persons full-course meals at tables at one time as required by its license; 2. Rule 61A-3.0141(3)(a)1., within section 561.29(1)(a), the audit period of April 1, 2010, through July 31, 2010, by not providing the requested business records; and 3. Rule 61A-3.0141(3)(a)1., within section 561.29(1)(a), on September 8, 2010, by not providing the requested business records. It is further RECOMMENDED that the final order find that the Department did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent violated section 561.20(2)(a)4., within section 561.29(1)(a). DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of September, 2011, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S THOMAS P. CRAPPS Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of September, 2011.
Findings Of Fact The Parties. Petitioner, the Department of Business Regulation and Professional Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco (hereinafter referred to as the "Division"), is an agency of the State of Florida charged with responsibility for enforcing Chapter 561, Florida Statutes. The Respondent is Walter Falcon, d/b/a Falcons JVJ General Store (hereinafter referred to as "Falcons"). At all times relevant to this proceeding Mr. Falcon held Florida alcoholic beverage license number 64-00453, series 2-COP (hereinafter referred to as the "License"). The License authorized Mr. Falcon to sell and possess alcoholic beverages on premises of Falcon's located at 1088 Highway 20, Interlachen, Putnam County, Florida. The Putnam County Sheriffs Office Investigation of Falcon's. In October of 1993, the Putnam County Sheriffs Office initiated an investigation of alleged sales of alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21 years at Falcons. On October 14, 19, 20 and 28, 1993 Pollyanna Alessi entered Falcons in furtherance of the Putnam County Sheriffs Office investigation. Ms. Alessi's date of birth is March 13, 1973. At all times relevant to this proceeding, Ms. Alessi was 20 years old. Ms. Alessi's appearance in October of 1993 was not such that an ordinary prudent person would believe her to be of legal age. On October 14, 1993: Ms. Alessi entered Falcon's and purchased a six-pack of Miller Genuine Draft beer. Petitioner's exhibit 2. Mr. Falcon sold the beer to Ms. Alessi. Mr. Falcon did not ask Ms. Alessi for any identification or other proof of age. Mr. Falcon also did not ask Ms. Alessi her age. On October 19, 1993: Ms. Alessi entered Falcon's and purchased a six-pack of Miller Genuine Draft beer. Petitioner's exhibit 3. Mr. Falcon sold the beer to Ms. Alessi. Mr. Falcon did not ask Ms. Alessi for any identification or other proof of age. Mr. Falcon also did not ask Ms. Alessi her age. On October 20, 1993: Ms. Alessi entered Falcon's and purchased one bottle of Miller Genuine Draft beer. Petitioner's exhibit 4. Mr. Falcon sold the beer to Ms. Alessi. Mr. Falcon did not ask Ms. Alessi for any identification or other proof of age. Mr. Falcon also did not ask Ms. Alessi her age. On October 28, 1993: Ms. Alessi entered Falcon's and purchased a six-pack of Coors beer. Petitioner's exhibit 5. Mr. Falcon sold the beer to Ms. Alessi. Mr. Falcon did not ask Ms. Alessi for any identification or other proof of age. Mr. Falcon also did not ask Ms. Alessi her age. The products purchased by Ms. Alessi were clearly labelled as beer, an alcoholic beverage, and were identified as alcoholic beverages. The Division's Investigation of Falcon's. On October 29, 1993, Chris LaBelle, while in the employ of the Division, participated in the investigation of alleged sales of alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21 years at Falcons. Ms. LaBelle's date of birth is April 29, 1974. At all times relevant to this proceeding, Ms. LaBelle was 19 years old. Ms. LaBelle's appearance on October 29, 1993 was not such that an ordinary prudent person would believe her to be of legal age. On October 29, 1993: Ms. LaBelle entered Falcon's and purchased a six-pack of Michelob Light beer. Petitioner's exhibit 7. Mr. Falcon sold the beer to Ms. LaBelle. Mr. Falcon did not ask Ms. LaBelle for any identification or other proof of age. Mr. Falcon also did not ask Ms. LaBelle her age. The products purchased by Ms. LaBelle were clearly labelled as beer, an alcoholic beverage, and were identified as alcoholic beverages.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, enter a Final Order finding that Walter Falcon, d/b/a Falcon's JVJ General Store, is guilty of the violations of Section 562.11(1)(a), Florida Statutes, alleged in the Administrative Action of December 17, 1993. It is further RECOMMENDED that Walter Falcon, d/b/a Falcon's JVJ General Store, alcoholic beverage license number 64-0453, series 2-COP be revoked. DONE AND ENTERED this 9th day of November, 1994, in Tallahassee, Florida. LARRY J. SARTIN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 9th day of November, 1994. APPENDIX The Division has submitted proposed findings of fact. It has been noted below which proposed findings of fact have been generally accepted and the paragraph number(s) in the Recommended Order where they have been accepted, if any. Those proposed findings of fact which have been rejected and the reason for their rejection have also been noted. Mr. Falcon did not file a proposed recommended order. The Division's Proposed Findings of Fact 1 Accepted in 3. 2 See 4. 3 Accepted in 5-7. 4 Accepted in 7. 5 Accepted in 8. 6 Accepted in 9. 7 Accepted in 10. 8 Accepted in 12-14. 9 Accepted in 14. 10 Accepted in 11 and 15. COPIES FURNISHED: Miguel Oxamendi Assistant General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1007 Jack McRay DBPR Acting General Counsel Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792 John J. Harris Acting Director Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792
Findings Of Fact At some time prior to March 1, 1963, Randall R. Aleno, a former deputy sheriff with the Volusia County, Florida, Sheriff's Department; his brother, Mick Aleno; his father, Charles Aleno; and his wife, Patty Aleno, formed Aleno's Enterprises, Inc., a Florida corporation, with Randall Aleno owning more than 50 percent of the corporate stock. Randall Aleno is the corporate president; Mick Aleno,the vice president; Charles Aleno, the treasurer; and Patty Aleno, the secretary. Having been a long-time resident of Volusia County, Randall Aleno saw a need for and developed a concept for a form of mobile concession stands to operate on the St. Johns River in the general area of Volusia County and the contiguous counties north and south of it. Before taking any definitive steps toward implementing this idea, Randall Aleno, on January 10, 1983, wrote letters both to the Commanding Officer of Port Operations for the U.S. Coast Guard in Jacksonville, Florida, and a representative of the Volusia County Health Department outlining in general terms the nature of his plan and seeking approval of those agencies for the project. Apparently, neither agency interposed any objection. He also contacted the local office of the Petitioner, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, where he spoke with Agents Dunbar, Blanton, and Clark, outlining his proposal. On at least one occasion, Mr. Aleno told Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco representative Clark, while at the counter in the Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco Daytona Beach office, that he intended to make bulk sales of beer from boats tied to buoys in the St. Johns River at the time of sales, but which would, when not in operation, be moored at the Tropical Marina in DeLand, Florida. In Dir. Clark's opinion, this type of proposed operation was not covered or provided for in the statutes or in the rules of the Division and he felt the applications for licenses for these operations should he denied. According to Mr. Clark, when he advised Mr. Aleno of this on several occasions, Mr. Aleno still wanted to try and submitted the application. At some time during this period, Mr. Aleno, who had been with the sheriff's office for 14 years, retired from that employment, 1/ purchased three houseboats (one 39-foot boat and two 26-foot boats) which he thoroughly rehabilitated to be capable of storage and the sale of sandwiches and package sales of soft drinks and beer. The sandwiches to be sold were to he pre- wrapped, the beverages in cans, coffee in styrofoam cups with lids, and all condiments would be in sealed packages. No food or drink was to be opened or consumed on board the boats, floating concession stands. When the boats were completed, because he had been told by Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco agents at the Daytona Beach office that a license would not be issued to a moving establishment, he secured a boat slip for each boat at the Tropical Marina. Mr. Aleno picked up the applications for beverage licenses from the Daytona Beach office. Me also wrote to a beverage supervisor at the Jacksonville office in an effort to prepare the way for his applications. Mr. Aleno was told, at some point in the procedure, that he would need to submit copies of the plans, the boat layouts and details of the operation. All of these, in addition to the letters from the Coast Guard and the county health department, were submitted for consideration with the applications. Mr. Aleno attempted to describe his proposal to each official with whom he came into contact. The local Division of Alcoholic Beverages Supervisor, Lt. Powell, and Mr. Clark admit that Mr. Aleno told them what he planned to do with his operation and how it would work. Lt. Powell reviewed the complete application and discussed it with Mr. Clark. He, Powell, was aware that the sales of unopened packages of beer would be made out on the river and not at the Tropical Marina before the application was forwarded to Tallahassee for action, but there was nothing written in the application to indicate the sales would be made up and down the river. The applications showed the location of the premises as Tropical Marina, Slips 41, 42 and 43. The applications were forwarded to Tallahassee in the normal course of business apparently without recommendation one way or the other by the local office. The licenses were issued on April 1, 1983, showing their location as Tropical Marina, Slips 41, 42 and 43, respectively, Lakeview Road, DeLand, Florida. The 1-APS licenses were issued to Aleno's Enterprises, Inc. trading as Randv's Subs #41, 42 and 43. (License Numbers 74-1565, 74-1566, and 74-1567) Respondent does not operate its boats as a steamship line. It does not carry people, other than employees, on the boats for pay or gratis. None of the boats go more than 100 miles in either direction from the point of mooring. Respondent has not been selling beverages for consumption on the premises, but has been making package sales only of beer off the boats. Barry Schoenfeld, Chief of Licensing Records for Respondent in Tallahassee, reviewed these applications and the license files sometime during the summer of 19-83 after the licenses were issued. His review of the files led him to conclude that the Respondent's operation does not qualify for a 1-APE license because the boats are not permanently moored at their docks. Florida Beverage Laws require, generally, a fixed permanent structure. There are some exceptions for movable vehicles such as steamships, trains, and airplanes and also for pleasure boats which go more than 100 miles per outing. He believes Respondent's boats would qualify for this latter license which, however, is a COP license, not an APS license. He has thoroughly examined the Respondent's applications; and the way the total file reads, it gives him the impression the boats would be moored at the dock in a fixed permanent location. This is why the licenses were issued. Since an obvious mistake was made, and since Mr. Schoenfeld did not know of any provision in the Florida Beverage Law which covers an operation such as that of Respondent, in the summer of 1983, he called Respondent, speaking with Mrs. Patty Aleno, and advised her the operation would have to cease. Upon advice of counsel, Respondent did not stop the operation at that time.
Recommendation That Respondent's licenses be revoked without prejudice so as to permit Respondent or its officers to, in the future, apply for the issuance of a beverage license, if otherwise qualified.
The Issue Each of the Petitioners is an applicant for an alcoholic beverage license. The issue in each case is whether the license application of each Petitioner should be granted or denied.
Findings Of Fact The parties have stipulated to the facts set forth in subparagraphs (a) through (o), below, which facts are taken as established without the need for proof: That the records from City National Bank in Respondent's Exhibit 30 accurately reflect that on November 22, 1996, the Petitioners received a $8,200,000 wire funds transfer from Parex Bank, Riga, Republic of Latvia, which was received through the Bank of New York. That the records from City National Bank in Respondent's Exhibit 30 accurately reflect that on November 22, 1996, the Petitioners transferred $8,000,000 to Rubin, Baum, Levin, et al., trust account. The Petitioners assert that this transfer was made to satisfy the terms of the Agreement entered into by the Petitioners and the MJP Entities. That the records from NationsBank in Respondent's Exhibits 32 and 33 accurately reflect that on November 13, 1996, SS Trans, Inc., transferred by check a sum in the amount of 1.5 million dollars ($1,500,000) to International Value Group's account at NationsBank. That the records from NationsBank in Respondent's Exhibit 33 accurately reflect that on November 21, 1996, SS Trans, Inc., made a funds wire transfer in the amount of $100,000 to Parex Bank, Riga, Republic of Latvia. That the records from NationsBank in Respondent's Exhibit 32 accurately reflect that on November 20, 1996, a company known as Oakdale Trading, Ltd., made a wire fund transfer in the amount of five million dollars ($5,000,000.00) to International Value Group's NationsBank account no. 3660385026. That the records from NationsBank in Respondent's Exhibit 32 accurately reflect that on November 21, 1996, International Value Group, Inc., made a wire funds transfer in the amount of 6.5 million dollars to Parex Bank, Riga, Republic of Latvia. That on January 14, 1997, the MJP Entities filed a Petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court in and for the Southern District of Florida, Broward Division, in Case Nos. 97-20219-BKC-PGH through and including 97-20226-BKC-PGH. That the MJP Entities as referenced herein are the Debtors in the bankruptcy petition referenced in Stipulation [g] above, and as referenced in the Exhibits 28 and 29, [mentioned] above. Larry Church, Chief Executive Officer for the Petitioners, was sole corporate officer of the MJP Entities while in bankruptcy until approximately June, 1997. He is no longer serving in such capacity. The Schedule of Assets filed by the Debtor MJP entities in U.S. Bankruptcy Court lists the three alcoholic beverage licenses that the Petitioners are seeking as assets of the Debtors. The Schedule of Assets filed by the Debtor MJP Entities in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court lists the three businesses for which the Petitioners seek licensure as assets of the Debtors. That Skobeltsyn was physically present in the State of Florida, United States of America, on November 19, 20, 21, and 22, 1996. That Skobeltsyn's B-1 Visa has been canceled by the United States' Embassy in Moscow, Russia, under INA 221(g) and INA 214(b). Skobeltsyn is permanently excluded from entry into the United States under INA 212(A)(6)(e). There is no formal appeal process available to Skobeltsyn because he is a foreign national outside the territory of the United States. However, Skobeltsyn may at any time submit a visa petition with the consular section of the United States' Moscow Embassy and attempt to establish that the earlier L-1 petition should not be a basis for denial. The alcoholic beverage license transfer applications by Wilan Corporation d/b/a Pure Platinum Club and Olympic Investments Corporations d/b/a Thee Doll House Club filed in January 1997 in the Division's Orlando District office have not been disapproved by the Division. However, the Division is investigating the qualifications of the applicants. Michael J. Peter also has a term in the sale agreements for these Orlando clubs that permits the clubs to use his trademarks. The United States Attorney's Office has not sought criminal charges against Michael Peter for violation of the terms of his Plea Agreement. Respondent is the State of Florida, Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco (hereinafter "the DABT"). On January 22, 1997, the Petitioners filed three alcoholic beverage transfer applications with the DABT. The Petitioner, Golden Show, Inc., d/b/a Solid Gold, filed an application for license number 23-00030 to sell alcoholic beverages at its premises located in Dade County. The Petitioner, Platinum Show, Inc., d/b/a Pure Platinum, filed an application for license number 16-00010 to sell alcoholic beverages at its premises located in Broward County. The Petitioner, Silver Show, Inc., d/b/a Solid Gold, filed an application for license number 16-00504 to sell alcoholic beverages at its premises located in Broward County. Cinderella Ice, Inc. (hereinafter "Cinderella Ice"), is the sole stockholder of the Petitioner corporations (hereinafter "the clubs"). Sergey V. Skobeltsyn (hereinafter "Skobeltsyn") is the sole corporate officer and sole stockholder of Cinderella Ice. Skobeltsyn is also the sole corporate officer of each of the Petitioner corporations. Following an investigation, by means of a Notice of Disapproval dated May 8, 1997, the DABT advised the Petitioners in writing that each of their alcoholic beverage license applications were disapproved. The Notice of Disapproval stated the following specific reasons for the proposed disapproval of each application: The Applicants have failed to correct errors and/or omissions on their alcoholic beverage license applications and have thus submitted incomplete alcoholic beverage license applications. The Applicants have failed to supply additional information required by the Division in order for it to conduct a full investigation of the qualifications of the applicants as required by Section 561.18, Florida Statutes, and as requested in the Division's letters of January 27, February 12, and April 18, 1997. The Applicants' sole corporate officer and sole shareholder of Cinderella Ice, Inc., Sergey V. Skobeltsyn is not qualified to hold an interest in an alcoholic beverage license. He is not legally authorized to manage and control the premises sought to be licensed as required by Rule 61A-3.017, Florida Administrative Code, and Section 561.17, Florida Statutes. Mr. Skobeltsyn is an alien national who has not been authorized by the U.S. Department of State or the U.S. Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, to enter the United States as a foreign investor who can manage and control a business in this country. Furthermore, Mr. Skobeltsyn's current B-1 Visa does not permit him to be an employee for hire in the United States. Therefore, Mr. Skobeltsyn cannot legally serve as an employee or corporate officer of the Applicant corporations, by which capacity he could legally exercise management and control of the business sought to be licensed. The Applicants do not exercise ultimate over-all control over the businesses sought to be licensed. The business conducted on the licensed premises is not managed and controlled by the Applicants, or managed by an authorized employee or employees of the applicants, contrary to Rule 61A-3.017, Florida Administrative Code, and Section 561.17, Florida Statutes. A person not qualified to hold an alcoholic beverage license has a direct or indirect financial interest in the businesses sought to be licensed contrary to Section 561.17(1), Florida Statutes, to wit: Michael J. Peter, who is disqualified from holding an alcoholic beverage license pursuant to Section 561.15, Florida Statutes, has a direct or indirect financial interest in the business sought to be licensed. The Applicants have falsely sworn to the alcoholic beverage license applications by not disclosing the direct or indirect financial interest of Michael J. Peter and/or of various business entities owned by Michael J. Peter, contrary to Section 559.791, Florida Statutes. The Applicants have falsely sworn to the alcoholic beverage license applications by not disclosing the direct or indirect financial interest of International Value Group, Inc., and/or Tathimtrans, LLP (a foreign corporation), and/or SS Trans, Inc., and/or Oakdale Trading (a foreign corporation), contrary to Section 559.791, Florida Statutes. The Applicants have falsely sworn to the alcoholic beverage license applications by declaring on the applications that the source of investment funds was an 8.2 million dollar commercial loan from Pareks Banka in Riga, Latvia, contrary to Section 559.791, Florida Statutes. The Notice of Disapproval also notified the Petitioners of their right to request a hearing. The Petitioners timely invoked that right. On November 22, 1996, the Petitioners entered into an agreement with Michael J. Peter, the prior license holder and owner of the three clubs, for purchase of the three clubs. The purchase price for these clubs was eight million dollars ($8,000,000). A key term of the agreement for sale was that the sellers would file a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The sellers, who would become the debtors in bankruptcy, would then submit a plan of reorganization to the bankruptcy court by which the clubs and their alcoholic beverage licenses would be transferred to the Petitioners. During the pendency of the bankruptcy, the purchasers would act as the managers of the clubs, and all profits from the clubs would be used to satisfy the debts of the clubs and sellers. In this regard, section 2(e) of the agreement of November 22, 1996, reads as follows: (e) Following the termination of the Receivership and until confirmation of the Plan, all earnings of the Clubs shall be used to pay down the liabilities of the Clubs as quickly as possible; provided, however, that MJP shall permit Purchaser or its designee to manage the Clubs following termination of the Receivership, subject to Purchaser or its designee obtaining the appropriate licenses therefore, and to receive a management fee not to exceed $70,000 per month (which shall accrue from month to month to the extent that the Clubs' revenues after paying all other operating expenses due for the month are insufficient. The sellers filed for bankruptcy on January 15, 1997, and the bankruptcy court issued an order by which the Petitioners were placed in possession of the clubs and were authorized to manage and control the clubs.1 However, as of the date of these proceedings, no plan for reorganization has been approved by the bankruptcy court. It appears that the Petitioners intend to propose a change in the plan, by means of which Skobeltsyn will contribute an additional one million dollars and Cinderella Ice will receive the real estate associated with two additional clubs in Orlando. Although Petitioners have paid eight million dollars for the clubs, the transfer of the clubs from the seller is not final and is still awaiting a confirmation order, or plan approval, by the bankruptcy court. Michael J. Peter is disqualified from holding an interest in an alcoholic beverage license by virtue of a Federal felony conviction, stemming from his criminal failure to disclose the interest of another person in these alcoholic beverage licensed businesses. Michael J. Peter entered into a consent order with the DABT wherein he agreed to divest himself, prior to January 15, 1997, of all ownership interests in any and all alcoholic beverage licenses in which he has an interest. Michael J. Peter also agreed to divest himself of all ownership interests in any entity holding an alcoholic beverage license. The November 22, 1996, sale agreement did not sell to the Petitioners the trademarks used by the businesses. The trademarks "Pure Platinum" and "Solid Gold" remain the personal assets of Michael J. Peter. Michael J. Peter and the Petitioners entered into a License and Support Agreement for the use of these trademarks. According to this agreement, the Petitioners are licensed to use the trademarks with certain specific restrictions, and with the requirement that certain business activities of the clubs be subject to Michael J. Peter's approval. For example, the Petitioners can transfer their rights to use the trademarks only if they sell the clubs, and then only in accordance with the following provision of the amended License and Support Agreement: However, if Licensee desires to effectuate a Transfer in conjunction with the sale of any or all of the Clubs, Licensee shall be permitted to do so, provided that (a) in Licensor's reasonable judgment, the transferee has the knowledge, expertise and financial wherewithal to maintain the standards of quality required by this Agreement, and (b) such transferee expressly assumes this Agreement in a written instrument in form and substance reasonably acceptable to Licensor. If either of the conditions stated in (a) or (b) are not met, Licensor shall be permitted to terminate this Agreement. Under the amended License and Support Agreement, Michael J. Peter is also authorized to exercise control over certain business decisions of the clubs, including the entertainers hired by the clubs to promote the trademarks and the quality of certain merchandise sold by the clubs. Michael J. Peter is also authorized to control, at least indirectly, the quality of the clubs' business activities by virtue of the language in the amended License and Support Agreement which, as a condition of the used of the trademarks, require that the clubs will . . . not apply the Licensed Marks to any Products of less than the highest quality, use the Licensed Marks in connection with any marketing, advertising or promotional materials or productions not of the highest quality, allow any Licensed Business to provide service, food and beverage or entertainment of less than the highest quality, or allow the appearance of any Licensed Business to be anything less than the highest quality. (Emphasis added.) The right to use the trademarks "Pure Platinum" and "Solid Gold" are rights that are very valuable to the Petitioners. These trademarks are a valuable asset in attracting customers to the Petitioners' businesses. It would be difficult to sell the Petitioners' businesses without also being able to transfer the right to continue to use the trademarks. By reason of his ownership of the subject trademarks, and by the rights and authority he has reserved to himself under the amended License and Support Agreement, Michael J. Peter has an interest, direct or indirect, in the Petitioners' businesses by reason of his ability to assert control of how some aspects of those businesses are operated, as well as by reason of a potential financial benefit to himself in the event of a future sale of the clubs, at which time Michael J. Peter would have an opportunity to dictate the terms on which the use of the licensed trademarks would be transferred to the new purchaser of the clubs. The Petitioners assert that they acquired the 8.2 million dollars for purchase of the clubs by a means of a commercial loan from Parex Bank. The purported bank loan was wired to the Petitioners on November 22, 1996, the same day they entered into the sale agreement for purchase of the clubs. Parex Bank is in Riga, Latvia, a country of the former Soviet Union. The Petitioners submitted to the DABT several loan documents. The documents were written in the Russian language, but English translations were also provided by the Petitioners. The loan application, dated November 19, 1996, consisted of a brief one page request. The purported loan agreement, titled "Credit Agreement No. 3102," and dated November 21, 1996, was the principal loan document that was presented by the Petitioners as evidence of a loan. Skobeltsyn was physically present in the State of Florida on the date that he and Cinderella Ice allegedly entered into his agreement with Parex Bank. The provision of law pursuant to which Skobeltsyn has been excluded from entry into the United States, INA 212(A)(6)(e), provides that any person who knowingly aids another alien to enter, or to try to enter, the United States in violation of law is inadmissible. The applications in these cases were accompanied by a copy of an L-1 visa petition which had earlier been filed on behalf of Skobeltsyn. Skobeltsyn does not now have an L-1 visa, or any other type of visa, for entry into the United States. An L-1 visa permits a foreign national to enter the United States to be employed by a subsidiary in the United States of a foreign corporation. The L-1 Visa petition represented that Skobeltsyn was entering the United States to be employed by International Value Group, Inc. (IVG). IVG is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tathramtrans, a Russian corporation, which is co-owned by Skobeltsyn and Yevgenii Sulyagin. Nothing else is known of Sulyagin. Skobeltsyn is the President of Tathramtrans. The L-1 petition states that the business of IVG is selling household goods, auto parts, and airplane parts to Russia. The DABT's investigation revealed that the business address stated on the L-1 petition for IVG was an empty store front, with no export business activity, or any other activity, occurring at the location. Rodion Sokrovichtchouk (Rodion),2 born on April 24, 1977, has been, according to his petition for an L-1 visa, a vice-president of IVG since 1993, when he was sixteen years old.3 He is also a Russian citizen. He entered the United States under a student visa, but has since obtained an L-1 visa to be employed by IVG in its export of goods to Russia. Rodion is a personal friend of Skobeltsyn. Rodion has been described as the eyes and ears of Skobeltsyn. Skobeltsyn communicates through Rodion with the employees of Cinderella Ice and its affiliates, and with his chief executive officer, Lawrence Church. Rodion is fluent in Russian and English. Rodion is an essential link between Skobeltsyn and the chief executive officer, Lawrence Church, because Mr. Church does not speak Russian and Skobeltsyn does not speak enough English to discuss business in English. Rodion is also a link in the transmission of business documents. For example, business checks and other bank documents of Cinderella Ice that require Skobeltsyn's signature are given to Rodion. Rodion then arranges for the documents to be delivered to Skobeltsyn, and when they are signed, the documents are returned to Rodion, who then distributes them to Lawrence Church or to whichever other employee needs the documents. Although Lawrence Church has a contract to manage the clubs, Rodion is, of necessity, actively involved in the management of the clubs, because he is the only person to whom Skobeltsyn can effectively communicate instructions. Furthermore, in view of the long personal and business relationships between Rodion and Skobeltsyn, and the relatively brief relationship between Church and Skobeltsyn, it is more likely than not that whatever managerial authority may actually be exercised by Church is subordinate to the authority actually exercised by Rodion in the management of Cinderella Ice and its clubs. The corporate office of IVG is located at the corporate offices of Cinderella Ice. Rodion now uses the business office that was used by Skobeltsyn prior to Skobeltsyn's exclusion from the United States. IVG has not limited its business activities to the export activities described in the L-1 petitions it filed on behalf of Skobeltsyn and Rodion. It has also entered into two contracts with Cinderella Ice and into one contract with Professional Parking Management, Inc. One of the contracts between IVG and Cinderella Ice is one pursuant to which, in the words of Lawrence Church, IVG "supplies hats, T-shirts, novelty items to the three applicant companies."4 The most reasonable inference that can be drawn from the little that appears in the record regarding this agreement, is that IVG has contracted with Cinderella Ice to provide the "Licensed Products" and items bearing the "Licensed Marks" described in the License and Support Agreement between Michael J. Peter and Cinderella Ice.5 That agreement, as amended, includes the following language at section 9.2: Licensor [Michael J. Peter] agrees to provide or to cause one or more of his affiliates to provide to Licensee [Cinderella Ice], but only to the extent requested by Licensee, Licensed Products and other items bearing the Licensed Marks or on or to which the Licensed Marks are to be applied for use at or in connection with the Licensed Businesses. It is clear from the information in the L-1 petitions that IVG does not have any expertise or experience in providing the types of goods described in the preceding paragraph. There does not appear to be any logical business reason for Cinderella Ice to enter into such an agreement with IVG. From the point of view of IVG, it would not make good business sense to enter into such an agreement unless it expected to make a profit by marking up the cost of the goods it sold to Cinderella Ice. From the point of view of Cinderella Ice, it would not make good business sense to buy goods at an inflated price from IVG when it can buy the same goods directly from Michael J. Peter, or his affiliates, without paying a marked-up price to IVG. The other contract between Cinderella Ice and IVG is titled Valet Parking Agreement. Under the terms of this agreement, dated December 23, 1996, IVG agrees to provide valet parking services and parking lot security services at all three of the clubs operated by Cinderella Ice. In exchange for providing such services, IVG ". . . shall be entitled to retain all income derived from the operation of the valet parking service and is obligated to pay all expenses, including security services, associated therewith." The Valet Parking Agreement dated December 23, 1996, includes the following introductory language: WHEREAS: The Concessionaire is in the business inter alia, of operating automobile valet parking services at divers clubs, restaurants, hotel and other public places. The very next day after signing the Valet Parking Agreement with Cinderella Ice, on December 24, 1996, IVG signed a contract with Professional Parking Management, Inc., a Florida corporation. The essence of that agreement is that Professional Parking Management will provide all of the valet parking and security services that IVG agreed to provide in its contract with Cinderella Ice. In exchange for providing those services, Professional Parking Management will receive fifty percent of the net pre-tax profit. The other fifty percent of the profit will be retained by IVG. It is clear from the information in the L-1 petitions that IVG does not have any expertise or experience in providing valet parking services or security services. Professional Parking Management, on the other hand, is operated by people who do have such expertise and experience. From the point of view of Cinderella Ice, it does not make good business sense to use IVG, which has no experience in such matters, as an intermediary to obtain valet parking services and parking lot security services from Professional Parking Management, an experienced provider of such services. Had Cinderella Ice contracted directly with Professional Parking Management, Cinderella Ice would be receiving half of the profits from the operation of the valet parking service. As it is, that share of the profits goes to IVG, in exchange for which IVG performs no service of value to Cinderella Ice. For reasons that are not explained in the record of these cases, the contracts described above between Cinderella Ice and IVG have the effect of diverting revenue from Cinderella Ice to IVG without any useful service or function being performed by IVG. In essence, under these contract, Cinderella Ice is giving money to IVG without receiving anything of value from IVG. There is evidence of additional unexplained entanglements between IVG, Rodion, and S.S. Trans Incorporated and Cinderella Ice and the clubs it operates. On at least one occasion, Cinderella Ice has paid an American Express credit card bill for Rodion. During March and April of 1997, Cinderella Ice made a number of payments to IVG and to S.S. Trans Incorporated. On at least one occasion, Rodion signed a twenty thousand dollar ($20,000) check on Cinderella Ice's account at First Union Bank. During the investigation of these applications, the DABT sought to learn more about the relationships between Rodion and Skobeltsyn, between Rodion and Cinderella Ice, between Rodion and IVG, between IVG and Skobeltsyn, between IVG and Cinderella Ice, and between S.S. Trans Incorporated, Skobeltsyn, and Cinderella Ice. To that end a DABT agent served Rodion with an investigative subpoena. When Rodion appeared in response to the subpoena, he asserted his right to remain silent guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Rodion did not answer any questions at all. During the entire DABT investigation of these applications, Skobeltsyn was unable to make himself available for interview in the State of Florida. The relationships mentioned immediately above, which the DABT has not been able to fully investigate, are sufficient to warrant an inference that at least Rodion and IVG have undisclosed financial interests in Cinderella Ice and/or the clubs operated by Cinderella Ice. The existence of such an undisclosed financial interest is the most logical explanation for the contracts between IVG and Cinderella Ice, pursuant to which IVG receives financial benefits without providing any useful service for Cinderella Ice. The inference is compelling when the foregoing is considered in light of the fact that, as addressed in further detail below, IVG sent six and a-half million dollars ($6,500,000) to the Parex Bank the day before the Parex Bank sent eight million two hundred thousand dollars ($8,200,000) back to Cinderella Ice. The DABT's licensing processes are conducted primarily through the DABT's local District Offices. The DABT issued to the Petitioners temporary licenses, prior to the issuance of permanent licenses. The DABT must issue a temporary license upon the submission of an application that on its face appears to disclose no grounds for denial. A license investigation is then conducted by the office responsible for the district in which the applicant's business is located. Because of the similarity of the three applications in these cases, the Dade County application of Golden Show, Inc., was processed and investigated through the Broward County office along with those of the other two Petitioners. The DABT assigned Special Agent Philip Krauss to investigate the qualifications of these applicants. Special Agent Krauss has had many years of experience conducting investigations of this type for the DABT. Special Agent Krauss began his investigation in these cases by conducting a thorough review of the applications. This is the first step in a license investigation process, and it includes a review of any supporting documents submitted with the applications, such as the personal questionnaires, and management agreements, leases, and contracts. The next step in a license investigation is to advise the applicant in writing of the need for any additional information to correct any errors, ambiguities, or omissions in the applications. In letters dated January 27, 1997, February 12, 1997, and April 18, 1997, the DABT requested additional information and documents from the Petitioners and advised them of deficiencies in the applications. One of the issues in these cases is whether the Petitioners complied with the DABT's requests. The funds used for the purchase of the clubs came from a bank in Latvia, a republic of the former Soviet Union. Even though the Iron Curtain has fallen, it is difficult to obtain investigative information from Russia, such as date of birth, place of birth, or employment verification. In the investigation of these cases, the DABT has had to rely to a greater degree than usual on the applicants for information. Therefore, it was more important than usual that the information provided by the applicants be complete, consistent, accurate, and timely. In the January 27, 1997, correspondence the DABT asked the Petitioners to provide, among other things, copies of all closing statements between Skobeltsyn and his corporate entities, and Michael J. Peter and his entities. The DABT never received a copy of a closing statement showing that the applicants had ever acquired an ownership interest in the businesses. Such a record could not be provided because the sale agreement does not reflect a final sale and transfer of the business assets. Rather, as mentioned earlier in these findings of fact, transfer of the business assets to Cinderella Ice will not be final until the bankruptcy court issues a confirmation order or plan approval. The DABT does not normally approve an application to transfer an alcoholic beverage license until there has been a final sale of the business to the applicant. Until the sale is final, the DABT views the application as incomplete. The investigation of these applications of necessity focused on Skobeltsyn, because he is the only natural person disclosed as having an ownership interest in any of the applicant businesses. In its January 27, 1997, letter the DABT also asked the Petitioners to provide a "Net Worth Statement for Skobeltsyn which identifies all assets, tangible and intangible, all incomes, royalties, savings, expense allowances and equity in real property." Similar requests were made in the DABT's letters of February 12, 1997, and April 18, 1997. In the April 18, 1997, letter the DABT also made it clear that it sought such information for each of the applicant corporations and for the officers and shareholders of each of the applicant corporations. The Petitioners responded through their attorneys that there was no net worth statement in existence, but provided what they described as "copies of various items that reflect Mr. Skobeltsyn's ownership of real and personal property such as an apartment, a vehicle, etc." In its April 18, 1997, letter, the DABT explained that the previously provided information did not provide sufficient information to conduct a full investigation of Skobeltsyn's financial background. The DABT had good reason to conclude that the previously provided information was not a complete response to the DABT's requests. For example, the information did not disclose all of the personal property and business investments that the DABT's investigation had revealed, such as Skobeltsyn's residence in North Miami Beach and his ownership interests in IVG and S.S. Trans Incorporated. The previously provided information also failed to mention such things as Skobeltsyn's business and personal bank accounts and credit card accounts at the Kazan branch of the Mezhcom Bank. As a result of these shortcomings, in its letter of April 18, 1997, the DABT rephrased its request for information, as follows: The Applicants are hereby requested to provide documents, records and/or information which identifies all assets, tangible and intangible, all income, royalties, savings, expense allowances, and equity in real property, of the Applicant corporations, its officers and shareholders. The Petitioners never fully complied with the above-quoted request. To the contrary, as noted in further detail below, the information provided by the Petitioners was incomplete, inconsistent, inaccurate, and illogical. And some of it simply appears to have been false. In order to conduct a complete investigation, the DABT must have sufficient information to verify the applicants' financial ability to obtain a commercial bank loan, especially when the loan is as large as the one involved in this case. The goal of the DABT's inquiry into such matters is to confirm that there are no other interested persons involved in the applicants' businesses that need to be disclosed to the DABT. The primary concern of the DABT in this regard is to make certain that all persons that have a direct or indirect interest in the businesses are qualified. The DABT could not conduct a full investigation without verifying the source of the Petitioner's investment funds. The purported loan agreement, Credit Agreement No. 3102, and the Personal Guaranty of Skobeltsyn state that the loan was secured by all of the tangible and intangible assets of the borrower, Cinderella Ice.6 The DABT attempted to verify the existence and extent of these tangible and intangible assets. The DABT apparently never received any information about any assets of Cinderella Ice, other than the $8,200,000 it received from the Parex Bank. If Cinderella Ice had no other assets, then it is most unlikely that a bank would loan an empty corporate shell $8,200,000 with which to start a business in a foreign country. If Cinderella Ice did have other assets, those assets should have been disclosed when requested by the DABT. The DABT's requests for information along these lines was for the purpose of confirming that the investment funds did not originate from persons other than Skobeltsyn or the Petitioners. According to the information submitted with the applications, Skobeltsyn was a bookkeeper for Tattramsgaz, a company in Kazan, Russia, from 1991 through 1992. From 1992 to the present, he asserts that he has been the president of two corporations in Russia, Edson, Inc., and Tachentrans (possibly the same entity as Tathramtrans). If the information submitted with the application is true, in four years, Skobeltsyn progressed from a job as a bookkeeper to become the president of a corporation that can obtain a loan of $8,200,000 from a Latvian bank within two days of submitting a brief one-paragraph loan request, a request which was submitted and approved without Skobeltsyn even having to go to the bank. In response to the DABT's request for a net worth statement, Skobeltsyn's attorneys provided a document titled Personal Financial Statement. It is a rather bare bones summary of what is purported to be Skobeltsyn's assets and liabilities as of April 29, 1997. It does not contain any identifying information regarding any of the assets and liabilities, with the sole exception of Skobeltsyn's ownership of "Thaimtrans Corporation" and Cinderella Ice. Some interesting details reported in the Personal Financial Statement include the following. Skobeltsyn is reported to have total assets of $69,702,000, and total liabilities of $29,062,000, which results in a net worth of $40,640,000. But he is reported to have only $40,000 cash in checking and savings accounts. He is reported to have none of the following: notes owed to him, certificates of deposit, treasury bills, savings certificates, life insurance, money market funds, precious metals, stocks, or bonds. Other than the cash mentioned above, Skobeltsyn's only reported assets consist of: Real estate (market value) 1,530,000 Vehicles (market value) 132,000 Ownership: "Thaimtrans" Corporation 60,000,000 Ownership: Cinderella Ice, Inc. 8,000,000 Notably, the Personal Financial Statement makes no mention of Skobeltsyn's ownership interest in S.S. Trans Incorporated. The Personal Financial Statement reports Skobeltsyn's liabilities as follows: Credit card obligations 15,000 Home mortgage 840,000 Auto loans 7,000 Personal Guarantee-Pareks Bank for Cinderella Ice, Inc. 8,200,000 Business loan obligations- Tathimtrans Corporation 20,000,000 Total Liabilities 29,062,000 44. During the course of the investigation, the DABT agents obtained numerous documents related to Skobeltsyn's purchase of a residence in North Miami Beach, Florida. Those documents include a Uniform Residential Loan Application signed under oath by Skobeltsyn on March 8, 1996. That application included representations as to Skobeltsyn's assets and liabilities. The only assets listed in the loan application of March 8, 1996, were as follows: Cash deposit towards purchase 80,000 Bank account at Nations Bank, Ft. Laud. 419,963 Net worth of businesses owned 2,000,000 1996 720 BMW automobile 90,000 Total Assets 2,589,963 The loan application also reported Skobeltsyn's net worth as $2,589,963, because he reported as his only liability a single credit card account, on which he reportedly owed no balance. The loan application included several other relevant details. Skobeltsyn reported that he was paying rent of $4,500 per month. Skobeltsyn reported that he was receiving a salary of $50,000 per month. Skobeltsyn answered "no" to the following question on the application: "Are you a co-maker or endorser on a note?" Skobeltsyn also answered "no" to the following question: "Have you had an ownership interest in property in the last three years?" Skobeltsyn answered "yes" to the following question: "Are you a permanent resident alien?" The loan application was signed under oath before a Notary Public. At the time of signing the loan application, Skobeltsyn was not a permanent resident alien. In support of the residential loan application discussed above, Skobeltsyn submitted a copy of a bank statement dated January 31, 1996, from NationsBank for an account in the name of S.S. Trans Incorporated. The bank statement showed an account balance as of January 31, 1996, of $419,963. The bank statement also shows a "miscellaneous debit" in the amount of $80,000, which is the exact amount that Skobeltsyn paid as a deposit on the residence he bought in North Miami Beach in March of 1996.7 In support of the residential loan application discussed above, Skobeltsyn submitted a letter dated February 8, 1996, written in Russian, and purportedly signed by the president of the Kazan Branch of the Mezhcom Bank, along with an English translation of the letter. The translation was prepared by Rodion. The text of the translated letter of February 8, 1996, from the Mezhcom Bank is as follows:8 We are acknowledging Mr. Sergey Skobeltsyn as a good customer of the Kazan branch. Mr. Sergey keeps large balances in U.S. currency. As a result we have issued to him a Eurocard, MasterCard and a Mexhchom Bank/Gold bank cards. He has always been successful in timely paying all debts. Indeed, he constantly keeps large balances in his business and personal accounts. We are anxious to assist him in all his business ventures. R. F. Kamaleev President Kazan Branch Mezhcom Bank In support of the same loan application, Skobeltsyn also submitted a letter on the stationery of Tathimtrans, Inc., dated February 8, 1996, and written in Russian, along with an English translation. This translation was also prepared by Rodion. The text of the translated letter of February 8, 1996, on Tathimtrans stationery is as follows: Mr. Sergey Skobeltsyn's annual income as President of "Tathimtrans" for 1995 was: U.S. $600,000.00. Mr. Sergey Skobeltsyn's projected income for 1996 is $650,000.00. N. A. Varfolomeeva Senior Accountant Also submitted in support of the mortgage loan application was a letter dated the eighth day of an untranslated month in 1996, written in Russian on the stationery of Alma, Inc., along with an English translation of the letter. Again, the translation was prepared by Rodion. The text of the translation of the letter on Alma, Inc., stationery is as follows: This letter verifies the sum of U.S. $150,000 on January 22, bank reference number 430016533 and the sum U.S. $350,000 on January 25, bank reference number 430024652, were wired to the account of "SS TRANS" for services rendered as per our agreement. F. R. Shakeirov Director On March 8, 1996, Skobeltsyn closed on the purchase of a residence in North Miami Beach, Florida. The purchase price was $800,000. In conjunction with the purchase, Skobeltsyn signed a mortgage in the amount of $500,000. It is clear from the documents related to Skobeltsyn's real estate transaction in March of 1996 that Skobeltsyn was treating the assets of S.S. Trans Incorporated as his personal assets. However, the Personal Financial Statement submitted in April of 1997 makes no mention of S.S. Trans Incorporated. This is one of a number of unexplained inconsistencies in the documentation surrounding Skobeltsyn's personal and business financial circumstances. It is clear from the documents related to Skobeltsyn's real estate transaction in March of 1996 that he represented his net worth at that time to be $2,589,963. Thirteen months later, in the Personal Financial Statement, he reports a net worth of $40,640,000. While it is within the realm of possibility that a talented and fortunate businessman could increase his net worth that much in a mere thirteen months, it is also highly unlikely that any mere mortal actually did so. Absent some plausible explanation, and there is none in the record of these cases, the most reasonable inference is that Skobeltsyn has from time to time provided false information about his financial circumstances. The Petitioners never provided the DABT with an itemization of Skobeltsyn's sources of income, as requested in the January 27, 1997, letter, and in later letters. In its letter of January 27, 1997, the DABT also required the Petitioners to submit the following information: Regarding Credit Agreement 3102: Provide a copy of the loan application, all schedules and attachments to the credit agreement, copies of all personal loan guaranty agreement(s) and a loan amortization schedule. The Petitioners responded to the DABT's request by asserting in the February 7, 1997, letter, the following: There is no loan application, schedules or attachments to the subject credit agreement, other than what has already been provided to AB&T in the original application package. The loan amortization schedule is included in the body of the subject credit agreement and in order to obtain copies of any personal guaranty documents in existence, if any, an extension of time is needed. Notwithstanding the Petitioners' assertions that there were no additional documents relating to the loan apart from a possible personal guaranty, on May 1, 1997, they subsequently submitted additional documents. The additional documents, which are discussed below, included copies of the original brief request for credit, a purported amendment to the credit agreement (along with a translation and a "correction" of the translation), and a request for an extension of time regarding the interest payments due under the credit agreement. The submission of documents late in an investigation, after representations that there are no additional documents, is the sort of inconsistency that raises the strong possibility of fabrication. Credit Agreement 3102 and the documents related to it raise more questions than they answer. The first problematic document is the loan application document, Respondent's Exhibit 8, which reads in its entirety, as follows: To the President AO "Pareks-Bank" Mr. Karginu V. I am requesting credit, for the sum of 8 200 000 (eight million two hundred thousand) U.S. dollars, for accomplishing a deal to buy three night clubs in South Florida, which are estimated by experts to be one of the best in the U.S. territory. We are ready to submit a business plan from which it would be clearly respectable and profitable for this type of business. Sincerely, Skobeltsyn, S.V. "CINDERELLA ICE, INC" 12000, BISCAYNE BLVD,FL. Signature Dated: 11/19/96 Cinderella Ice, Inc. Corporate Seal 1996 Florida During the course of the application investigation, the Petitioners' attorney explained that the business plan referred to in the brief credit application was not the usual type of business plan. Rather, as explained in the attorney's letter of May 1, 1997: The "business plan" submitted in connection with the subject loan application and referenced in Mr. Skobeltsyn's letter of November 1996 to the Pareks Bank consisted of copies of the voluminous Receiver's Reports and proforma profit and loss statements related to the business. I have enclosed herewith copies of the Receiver's Reports submitted from March through October 1996 which included the subject profit and loss statements. The Receiver's Reports were obviously the most accurate description of the financial state of the businesses that existed at the time. It was most logical to submit that data rather than a projected business plan. The Pareks Bank accepted those reports in lieu of the business plan. It is nothing less than incredible that, within 48 hours, the Pareks Bank, solely on the basis of a one-paragraph loan request, a collection of receiver's reports, and Skobeltsyn's personal guarantee, would loan $8,200,000 to a brand-new Florida corporation with no assets, so that it could buy a portion of the business assets of a convicted criminal, all of which assets were in the hands of a receiver, and were involved in complex litigation involving millions of dollars of claims. During the course of its investigation, the DABT requested a copy of the "Schedule One" mentioned in Section 2.5 of Credit Agreement No. 3102. By letter of May 1, 1997, the Petitioners' attorney explained: Schedule One to Credit Agreement No. 3102 is a copy of the November 1996 agreement between MJP and Cinderella Ice, Inc., as confirmed by the December 23, 1996 amendment to Section 2.5 of the subject credit agreement, which is enclosed. Enclosed with the letter of May 1, 1997, were three documents; a document in Russian that purports to be an amendment to Section 2.5 of Credit Agreement No. 3102, an English translation of the purported amendment, and a written statement in English signed by Lawrence Church describing an error in the translation. The English translation reads as follows: 23.12.96 Amendment part of section 2.5 of the Credit Agreement Contract No. 3102, dated November 20, 1996, shall be the contract between Cinderella Ice, Inc. and M. J. Peter, executed on December 21, 1996. V. Kargin President, AO Parex Bank Church's clarification of the above reads as follows: To Whom It May Concern Please be advised that due to a translator's scriviners error, translation document dated 23.12.96 should read: "Amendment part of section 2.5 of the Credit Agreement Contract No. 3102, dated November 21, 1996, shall be the contract between Cinderella Ice, Inc. and M. J. Peter, executed December 20, 1996." Lawrence Church Agent for Cinderella Ice, Inc. (Emphasis in original.) The purported amendment, with or without Church's clarification, is unintelligible and, therefore, of questionable validity. One cannot tell which part of Section 2.5 the amendment purports to amend. The purported amendment could just as logically be interpreted as an amendment to the first sentence of Section 2.5 or as an amendment to the last sentence of Section 2.5. The legitimacy of the purported amendment is also cast into doubt by the fact that it purports to be a unilateral amendment by the bank, without Skobeltsyn's signature agreeing to the amendment. Further, the purported amendment refers to a contract between Cinderella Ice and M. J. Peter executed on December 20 or December 21, 1996. Cinderella Ice and Michael J. Peter did not enter into a contract on either of those dates. Last, but not least, the purported amendment does not answer the underlying question which was posed by the DABT; the still unanswered question being: What comprised the original "Schedule One" referred to in Section 2.5 of Credit Agreement No. 3102 prior to any amendment of the agreement? In the final analysis, the most logical inference to be drawn from the purported amendment to Section 2.5 of the credit agreement is that it is a clumsily executed fabrication designed to conceal an oversight or omission in an illegitimate and false document titled Credit Agreement No. 3102. The credit agreement states that the interest rate on the loan is 9 percent per year to be paid monthly. The monthly interest due on an 8.2 million dollar loan at 9 percent per annum is $61,500 per month. The Petitioners attempted to explain the absence of interest payments by submitting to the DABT a copy of a request to Parex Bank dated December 28, 1996, for a six-month extension of the interest payments, which, curiously, also includes a promise to begin making interest payments by no later than April 30, 1997. The request for a six-month extension appears to be signed by Skobeltsyn, as well as by someone identified in the document as "President, AO Parex Bank." It is not clear whether the second signature constitutes agreement to the request or merely acknowledgment of receipt of the request. In April 1997, the Petitioners made a single interest payment of thirty thousand dollars. This is the only interest payment that the Petitioners have made on the purported loan. The Petitioners presented no persuasive evidence to explain the absence of interest payments.9 The absence of regular interest payments by the Petitioners casts a significant cloud of doubt over the legitimacy of the loan. The most reasonable inference to be drawn from all of the irregularities and inconsistencies surrounding the purported 8.2 million dollar loan, is that the document titled Credit Agreement No. 3102 is some type of sham or subterfuge, and there is no genuine loan agreement from the Parex Bank. During the period from January 22, 1996, through November 21, 1996, S.S. Trans Incorporated received ten transfers of large sums of money from sources unknown to the DABT. Most of the funds originated from Parex Bank in Latvia, but four of the transfers originated from unknown banks and accounts. Four of the wire transfers from the Parex Bank came from account number 0714926. The total amount received by S.S. Trans Incorporated from account number 0714926 was one million five hundred seventy thousand dollars ($1,570,000). The sums transferred ranged in amount from seventy thousand dollars ($70,000) to one million dollars ($1,000,000). The sums transferred into the account comprised a grand total of two million seven hundred seventy thousand dollars ($2,770,000). IVG received money transfers totaling six and a half million dollars ($6,500,000) in November of 1996. On November 13, 1996, S.S. Trans Incorporated transferred one and a half million dollars ($1,500,000) to IVG's account at NationsBank. On November 20, 1996, a company known as Oakdale Trading, Ltd., transferred five million dollars ($5,000,000) to IVG's account at NationsBank. On November 21, 1996, IVG made a wire funds transfer in the amount of six and a half million dollars ($6,500,000) to Parex Bank, Riga, Latvia, into account number 0714926. On the same day, S.S. Trans Incorporated made a wire funds transfer in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) to the same account number at Parex Bank. The very next day, on November 22, 1996, Cinderella Ice received an eight million two hundred thousand dollar ($8,200,000) wire transfer from Parex Bank. On December 12, 1996, Cinderella Ice wrote a check in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) to S.S. Trans Incorporated. The one hundred thousand dollars paid to S.S. Trans Incorporated on December 12, 1996, was part of the proceeds of the 8.2 million dollars that Cinderella Ice had received from Parex Bank. These unexplained transfers of large sums of money, occurring immediately prior to the disbursement of the purported loan funds from the Parex Bank, indicate that there were other undisclosed entities providing investment capital for the purchase of the clubs. The use of numerous corporate entities as part of the ownership structure, and the use of other corporations and business entities to hide ownership or to disguise the source of payments, constitutes a course of conduct indicative of the existence of undisclosed interests. The one hundred thousand dollars paid on December 12, 1996, by Cinderella Ice to S.S. Trans Incorporated is undoubtedly related to the one hundred thousand dollars that S.S. Trans Incorporated transferred to the Parex Bank on November 21, 1996. The evidence of unexplained wire transfers by other interests associated with Skobeltsyn and the Petitioners further justifies the DABT's concern that the Petitioners have not submitted complete applications by virtue of their failure to provide to the DABT the additional information it requested of the Petitioners. Specifically, the DABT requested that the Petitioners provide: "A listing, which contains name and address of all financial institutions, with account numbers, and current balance as of December 31, 1996, for which Skobeltsyn is a sole or joint account holder, in the United States or elsewhere." The DABT repeated its request for this information on at least two additional occasions. The Petitioners did not satisfactorily comply with this request, thus preventing the DABT from conducting a full investigation. The Petitioners responded to these requests for account information by replying that they would not object to any subpoenas issued on the accounts of IVG and S.S. Trans Incorporated that were discovered by the DABT. The Petitioners also noted in their response that they interpreted the request as not referring to corporate accounts, but as limited to Skobeltsyn's personal accounts in which he was a "sole or joint account holder." However, at least by April 18, 1997, the Petitioners knew that the request encompassed corporate accounts to which Skobeltsyn has access, including the accounts for S.S. Trans Incorporated. In their May 1, 1996, letter, the Petitioners noted their narrower interpretation, but nevertheless provided information regarding some of the corporate accounts and expressed their willingness to cooperate with the DABT's efforts to subpoena "any bank anywhere in the world for any records that AB&T seeks." The Petitioners' stated willingness to cooperate with the DABT's subpoenas was worthless, however, without the requested list of bank accounts. Without the requested list, including the names and addresses of the financial institutions, and the account numbers, the DABT could not effectively serve subpoenas. It is clear from the evidence in this case that there are other bank accounts in the control of Skobeltsyn, or to which Skobeltsyn has access, beyond those which the Petitioners have disclosed and which the DABT has been able to examine. The DABT's examination of the bank records from NationsBank revealed references to accounts in foreign banks. These are accounts that were not disclosed to the DABT, despite repeated requests. For example, in the wire transfer of November 21, 1996, for six and a half million dollars ($6,500,000) from IVG to Parex Bank, the transfer was made into Parex Bank account number 0714926. S.S. Trans Incorporated made a wire transfer in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) to the same account. The Petitioners never provided to the DABT a list or other information identifying this account. The wire transfers to S.S. Trans Incorporated of January 22, 1996, through August 22, 1996, of funds ranging in amount from one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) to one million dollars ($1,000,000) originated from banks and accounts that were never identified or disclosed to the DABT. Among the bank accounts the DABT sought to obtain information about were the bank accounts of IVG, a corporation of which Skobeltsyn was President and in which he has an ownership interest. When the DABT repeated its request for the IVG bank account information, the Petitioners' attorney responded with a letter of May 1, 1997, which included the following: As to the banking records from IVG's Capital Bank account from the time that Mr. Skobeltsyn acquired his interest in IVG, please note that the account is now closed and without Mr. Skobeltsyn['s] presence in the United States, I cannot produce the records sought inasmuch as he was the sole signer on the account. The above-quoted response is indicative of a lack of cooperation on the part of the applicants. Regardless of whether the account was closed or not, and regardless of whether Skobeltsyn could return to the United States or not, with written authorization from Skobeltsyn, the attorneys for the applicants could have obtained the records and could have furnished them to the DABT. The above-quoted response about IVG's bank account is also inconsistent with other information about the activities of International Value Group, Inc. Since December of 1996 and continuing through the date of the final hearing in this case, IVG has been engaged in at least two business activities in Florida, specifically the two business activities described in paragraphs 20 through 28 of these findings of fact. In the normal course of events those two business activities have been regularly generating revenues in the form of cash, checks, and/or credit cards. It is contrary to common sense to believe that IVG is engaged in business without having an open checking account. Yet another example of the Petitioners' inconsistency and inaccuracy is reflected in the following statement from their attorney in a letter of May 1, 1997, responding to DABT comments that Skobeltsyn had failed to fully disclose his employment during the past five years: Further, in his personal questionnaire listing his employment for the past five years, Mr. Skobeltsyn did not recite that he had been president of International Value Group and president of SS Transcorp, Inc., because at the time he completed the questionnaire, Mr. Skobeltsyn may not have been president of either company. He was a shareholder in SS Transcorp, Inc., which had no assets in, and was doing no business in, the United States. Further, Mr. Skobeltsyn did not state that he was "president" of International Value Group, as he may have not yet served as president. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Mr. Skobeltsyn received no salary or benefits of any nature whatsoever from either corporation and therefore, correctly did not recite the names of these corporations under a heading which requested employment information. The foregoing assertions become troublesome when considered in light of the following facts. Skobeltsyn signed his personal questionnaire on December 29, 1996. On November 13, 1996, Skobeltsyn signed a check written on the account of S.S. Trans Incorporated at NationsBank in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, in the amount of $1,500,000. The check was payable to International Value Group, Inc. The check was good, and there were funds left in the account after it cleared. When Skobeltsyn opened the S.S. Trans Incorporated account at NationsBank, he identified himself as president of the corporation. On November 13, 1996, Skobeltsyn opened a bank account in the name of International Value Group, Inc., at NationsBank in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, with the $1,500,000 check from S.S. Trans Incorporated. When he opened the account, he identified himself as president of International Value Group, Inc. On or about December 27, 1996, Skobeltsyn and Rodion signed a corporate resolution in conjunction with a bank account at First Union Bank of Florida in the name of International Value Group, Inc., in which Skobeltsyn is described as president of the corporation. All three of the alcoholic beverage applications at issue in these cases were signed on December 29, 1996. On each of the three applications, Skobeltsyn is listed as holding each of the following offices in each of the applicant corporations: President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer. On each of the applications, Cinderella Ice is listed as the owner of 100 percent of the stock of each of the applicant corporations. Each of the three applications contains a statement reading: "Sergey V. Skobeltsyn is the sole director, officer and shareholder of Cinderella Ice, Inc." The records of the Florida Department of State include the following information regarding Golden Show, Inc. The articles of incorporation were filed with the Secretary of State on November 26, 1996. Skobeltsyn was the initial director of the corporation. The articles of incorporation did not identify any initial officers of the corporation. On January 27, 1997, Skobeltsyn, in his capacity as director, signed a document titled Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation of Golden Show, Inc. That document was filed with the Secretary of State on January 31, 1996. The document states that several amendments were adopted on January 27, 1997. One of those amendments reads as follows: SERGEY V. SKOBELTSYN was elected President, Secretary, Vice-President, Treasurer and Director, and his address is 3363-5 N. Federal Highway, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33306." The records of the Florida Department of State include the following information regarding Silver Show, Inc. The articles of incorporation were filed with the Secretary of State on November 26, 1996. Skobeltsyn was the initial director of the corporation. The articles of incorporation did not identify any initial officers of the corporation. On January 27, 1997, Skobeltsyn, in his capacity as director, signed a document titled Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation of Silver Show, Inc. That document was filed with the Secretary of State on January 31, 1996. The document states that several amendments were adopted on January 27, 1997. One of those amendments reads as follows: SERGEY V. SKOBELTSYN was elected President, Secretary, Vice-President, Treasurer and Director, and his address is 3363-5 N. Federal Highway, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33306." The records of the Florida Department of State include the following information regarding Platinum Show, Inc. The articles of incorporation were filed with the Secretary of State on November 26, 1996. Skobeltsyn was the initial director of the corporation. The articles of incorporation did not identify any initial officers of the corporation. On January 27, 1997, Skobeltsyn, in his capacity as director, signed a document titled Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation of Platinum Show, Inc. That document was filed with the Secretary of State on January 31, 1996. The document states that several amendments were adopted on January 27, 1997. The amendments concerned such matters as the principal place of business of the corporation, the mail address of the corporation, and the new registered agent for the corporation, but no provision regarding the election or appointment of any officers. The records of the Department of State do not show that anyone has ever been appointed or elected to the offices of President, Vice-President, Secretary, or Treasurer of Platinum Show, Inc. The records of the Florida Department of State include the following information regarding Cinderella Ice, Inc. The articles of incorporation were filed with the Secretary of State on August 22, 1996. A person named Gregory Romenski was the initial director of the corporation. The articles of incorporation did not identify any initial officers of the corporation. On January 27, 1997, Skobeltsyn, in his capacity as director, signed a document titled Articles of Amendment to Articles of Incorporation of Cinderella Ice, Inc. That document was filed with the Secretary of State on January 31, 1997. The document states that several amendments were adopted on January 27, 1997. One of those amendments reads as follows: GREGORY ROMENSKI resigned as Director and SERGEY V. SKOBELTSYN was elected Director in his stead. SERGEY V. SKOBELTSYN was also elected President, Vice-President, Secretary, and Treasurer of the corporation and his address is: 3363-5 N. Federal Highway, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33306. Skobeltsyn's apparent indifference to accuracy is reflected once again in the fact that at the time he signed his personal questionnaire he had not been elected as an officer of either Cinderella Ice or of any of the applicant corporations. Further, at the time he signed his personal questionnaire, Skobeltsyn was not a director of Cinderella Ice and Cinderella Ice had an undisclosed director who has since resigned. Most of these irregularities have since been cleared up, but the statements were false at the time they were made. The DABT has been unable to interview Skobeltsyn because he is legally excluded from entry into the United States. One of the most important steps in any investigation is to provide the applicant with an opportunity to answer questions. Skobeltsyn is in a position to answer many of the questions that were raised during the investigation. The Petitioners offered the DABT an opportunity to go to Latvia to interview Skobeltsyn and Latvian banking officials. The DABT refused to travel abroad because of safety concerns and because the investigator's law enforcement powers, particularly the power to place a witness under oath, did not extend as far as Latvia. The DABT cannot conduct a full investigation of the applications in these cases without an interview of Skobeltsyn taken under oath.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco issue a Final Order in this case denying all three of the applications for alcoholic beverage licenses at issue in these cases. DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of March, 1998, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. MICHAEL M. PARRISH Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of March, 1998.
The Issue Whether the Petitioner, Moishes Steakhouse & Seafood, Inc., timely submitted an application to record a lien for license number 23-02731 4COP.
Findings Of Fact On or about March 3, 1999, Armar Inc., Arnaldo Bou, individually, and Martha Pinango, individually, as debtors, and the Petitioner, by Eugenio D'Arpino, as president of the company, the secured party, executed a security agreement (chattel mortgage) related to beverage license 23-02731, series 4COP. Such security agreement recognized a priority lien for the Petitioner, Moishes Steakhouse & Seafood, Inc., and included a promissory note executed by the debtors. The promissory note, dated March 3, 1999 (presumably executed on or about that date), provided: THIS NOTE IS NOTE ASSIGNABLE AND NON- ASSUMABLE WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE SECURED PARTY. THIS NOTE IS SECURED BY A SECURITY AGREEMENT (CHATTEL MORTGAGE) AND UCC-1 WHICH SHALL CREATE A PRIORITY LIEN (1ST PLACE LIEN) ON STATE OF FLORIDA ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE NO: 23- 01686, series 4 COP quota. The security agreement and promissory note were not provided to the Department within 90 days of March 3, 1999. Apparently, the fact that the note and security agreement make reference to different alcoholic beverage license numbers is not an issue. Neither party has raised that issue. The Petitioner forwarded the note and security agreement to the Department for recordation on or about September 21, 1999. At that time the Department received an application to record a lien for license no. 23-02731, series 4COP. On October 11, 1999, the Department sent Petitioner a letter declining the application because it was not made within 90 days after the creation of the lien. The Department requested a newly executed security agreement so that the dates would show the request for recording within 90 days of the application. It is the Department's position that the lien application should have been submitted within 90 days of its creation in order to comply with the mandatory guidelines of the statute. For purposes of this case, the Department argued that the "creation of the lien" was on or about March 3, 1999, or, at the latest, March 15, 1999 (a date noted in the escrow agreement). The Petitioner timely sought an administrative review of the Department's decision. It is the Petitioner's position that the lien did not "break escrow" until August of 1999, and that, as a matter of law, that is the point in time from which the 90 day period should run. From the Petitioner's perspective, the "creation of the lien" as used by the statute dates from when the transaction broke escrow. All parties agree that the statute does not specifically address escrow transactions.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, enter a final order approving the Petitioner's application to record a lien on the subject alcoholic beverage license. DONE AND ENTERED this 1st day of March, 2002, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. J. D. PARRISH Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 1st day of March, 2002. COPIES FURNISHED: Sherrie Barnes, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2202 Major Jorge R. Herrera Department of Business and Professional Regulation 8685 Northwest 53rd Terrace Augusta Building, Suite 100 Miami, Florida 33166 Louis J. Terminello, Esquire Terminello & Terminello, P. A. 2700 Southwest 37th Avenue Miami, Florida 33133-2728 Hardy L. Roberts, III, General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2202 Richard Turner, Director Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco Department of Business and Professional Regulation Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792
The Issue Whether or not on or about September 28, 1976, one Leouigildo Hernandez, an agent, servant or employee of the beverage licensed premises of Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, did have in his possession, on the aforementioned beverage license premises, a controlled substance, to wit; cocaine, contrary to Section 893.13, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. Whether or not on or about September 28, 1976, one Leouigildo Hernandez, an agent, servant or employee of the beverage license premises of Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, did have in his possession, with the intent to sell, a controlled substance; cocaine, and whether said cocaine was sold to one E. Santiago, for the price of $100 in U.S. currency, and whether said sale was consummated at the aforementioned beverage license premises, on the aforementioned date, contrary to Section 893.13, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. Whether or not on or about October 30, 1976, one Thelma Bilbao, a/k/a Thelma Clemencia Cruz, a/k/a Thelma Morales, an agent, servant or employee of the beverage license premises of Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, did have in her possession, on the aforementioned beverage license premises, a controlled substance, to wit; cocaine contrary to Section 893.13, F.S. thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. Whether or not on or about October 30, 1976, one Thelma Bilbao, a/k/a Thelma Clemencia Cruz, a/k/a Thelma Morales, an agent, servant or employee of the beverage license premises of Intimo Lounge, Inc. d/b/a Intimo Lounge, did have in her possession, with the intent to sell, a controlled substance, to wit; cocaine, and whether or not said cocaine was sold to one E. Santiago, for the price of $100 U.S. currency, and whether or not said sale was consummated at the aforementioned beverage licensed premises on the aforementioned date, contrary to Section 893.13, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. Whether or not on November 4 & 5, 1976, one Thelma Bilbao, a/k/a Thelma Clemencia Cruz, a/k/a Thelma Morales, an agent, servant or employee of the beverage licensed premises of Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, did have in her possession, on the aforementioned beverage licensed premises, a controlled substance, to wit; cocaine, contrary to Section 893.13, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. Whether or not on or about November 4 & 5, 1976, one Thelma Bilbao, a/k/a Thelma Clemencia Cruz, a/k/a Thelma Morales, an agent, servant or employee of the beverage licensed premises of Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, did have in her possession, with the intent to sell, a controlled substance, to wit; cocaine, and whether or not said cocaine was sold to one E. Santiago, for the price of $2,200, U.S. currency, and whether or not said sale was consummated at the aforementioned beverage licensed premises, on the aforementioned date, contrary to Section 893.13, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. A count seven was originally charged against the Respondent, but that charge was dismissed at the commencement of the hearing. A count eight was originally charged against the Respondent, but that charge was dismissed at the commencement of the hearing. Whether or not on or about November 20, 1976, a bottle of non-tax paid alcoholic beverage, labeled Ron Medeliin Rum, was discovered on the licensed premises, and whether or not said bottle bore no federal strip stamp or any other indication that the lawfully levied federal and/or state taxes had been paid, contrary to Section 562.16, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. Whether or not on or about September 1, 1976, and continuing until on or about November 24, 1976, the beverage licensed premises of Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, did maintain a public nuisance, to wit; maintain a place where controlled substances were illegally sold, kept or used, contrary to Section 823.10, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S. Whether or not investigation revealed that on or about November 20, 1976, the Respondent, its agent, servant, or employee, did remove, deposit, or conceal a beverage, to wit, one (1) 2,000 cc bottle of Ron Medeliin Rum, with the intent to defraud the state of tax, contrary to Section 562.32, F.S. and Section 562.30, F.S., thereby violating Section 561.29, F.S.
Findings Of Fact At all times material to this complaint the Respondent, Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, was the holder of a license no. 23-1901, held with the State of Florida, Division of Beverage, and that license was for the premises located at 1601 Collins Avenue Miami Beach, Florida. The management of the licensed premises makes arrangements to hire entertainment in the form of musicians. This arrangement is made through agreement with the band leader. One of these agreements was made with a band leader who had as his band member Leouigildo Hernandez. On September 28, 1976, Officer E. Santiago, of the Miami Beach, Florida, Police Department entered the licensed premises and while in the licensed premises entered into discussion with Hernandez. Hernandez left the bar proper and came back with an amount of a substance known as cocaine. Santiago paid Hernandez $100 for the quantity of cocaine and the sale was consummated in the licensed premises. On October 30, 1976, Officer Santiago returned to the licensed premises. Santiago had been in the licensed premises many times prior to that occasion. Among the persons he had seen in the bar was Thelma Bilbao, a/k/a Thelma Clemencia Cruz, a/k/a Thelma Morales. Morales was the girlfriend of Anthony Bilbao, one of the principals in the ownership of the licensed premises. Morales had also served Santiago drinks in the bar on more than 50 occasions. On the evening in question, October 30, 1976, discussion was entered into between Santiago and Morales about the purchase of a substance known as cocaine. Morales produced a quantity of the cocaine and reached across the bar that she was standing behind and handed the quantity of the substance cocaine to Santiago, who was in the area where customers were served at the bar. Santiago paid her $100 for the cocaine. In the late hours of November 4 and early hours of November 5, 1976, Santiago again entered the licensed premises, his purpose for going to the licensed premises was to purchase a large quantity of cocaine from Morales. This arrangement had been entered into based upon the sample of cocaine that had been provided him on October 30, 1976. Morales left the licensed premises and returned 3 to 5 minutes later with a quantity of cocaine, for which Santiago paid her $2,200. On one of the above occasions of a purchase of cocaine from Morales, while in the licensed premises, Morales had conferred with Anthony Bilbao. In the course of that conference, Bilbao told Morales to be careful to whom she sold because "you don't know him", meaning Santiago. In the course of an investigation in the license premises on November 28, 1976, a bottle of non-tax-paid alcoholic beverage, labeled Ron Medeliin Rum, was discovered in the licensed premises, which bore no federal strip stamp or any other indication that the lawfully levied federal and/or state taxes had been paid. The size of the bottle was 2,000 cc.
Recommendation Based upon the violations as established in the hearing on the notice to show cause, it is recommended that the license no. 23-1901 held by Respondent, Intimo Lounge, Inc., d/b/a Intimo Lounge, be revoked. DONE AND ENTERED this 24th day of February, 1977, in Tallahassee ,Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings 530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: William Hatch, Esquire Michael B. Solomon, Esquire Division of Beverage Theodore M. Trushin, Law Office The Johns Building 420 Lincoln Road, Number 600 725 Bronough Street Miami Beach, Florida 33139 Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Nathaniel Barone, Esquire 777 N.E. 79th Street Miami, Florida 33138
