Connecticut Fine Wine & Spirits, LLC v. Dept. of Consumer Protection, Liquor Control Commission

Syllabus

The plaintiffs appealed from the trial court's judgment dismissing their administrative appeal from the defendant commission's decision imposing civil penalties for violations of a state statute (§ 30-94 (a)) and its correspond- ing regulation (§ 30-6-A29 (a)), which prohibit a licensed permittee, in any transaction with another permittee, from receiving any free goods, gratuities, gifts or other inducements in connection with the sale of alcoholic beverages. The commission concluded that the plaintiffs had received an improper inducement in the form of free labor, namely, that employees of two whole- sale beer distributors had stocked the shelves of the plaintiffs' retail liquor stores with newly delivered beer. On appeal, the plaintiffs claimed, inter alia, that the court improperly concluded that substantial evidence supported the commission's finding that the beer distributors' employees provided the plaintiffs with free labor by stocking the shelves of the plaintiffs' stores. Held: The trial court properly concluded that the commission's decision was supported by substantial evidence, as the members of the commission rea- sonably credited the testimony of K, a liquor control agent with twenty- three years of experience, regarding what transpired at the plaintiffs' two retail stores, and the commission was free to credit K's firsthand account over the testimony of the plaintiffs' witnesses, who testified only generally about the stores' policies, procedures and practices but were not present when the beer was delivered and placed on the stores' shelves. This court declined to review the plaintiffs' claim that, even if the commission reasonably had concluded that the distributors were engaged in prohibited stocking, the receipt of such free labor was not an inducement under § 30- 94 (a) and § 30-6-A29 (a) of the regulations without proof of an agreement between the distributors and the stores for the provision of that free labor, as the plaintiffs failed to raise