Nowhere in the statutes relating to the liquor laws is there any requirement that an applicant show need before obtaining a license and the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission cannot do so by rule; therefore, rules 2 and 13, which require such a showing, are invalid. Bond v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 210 Neb. 663, 316 N.W.2d 600 (1982).

The power to regulate liquor business, except as specifically delegated in Chapter 53, R.R.S.1943, is vested exclusively in the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission. J K & J, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Commission, 194 Neb. 413, 231 N.W.2d 694 (1975).

Nebraska Liquor Control Commission has power to regulate distribution and sale of alcoholic liquors. T & N P Co., Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Commission, 189 Neb. 708, 204 N.W.2d 809 (1973).

Power to regulate all phases of control of manufacture, distribution, sale and traffic in intoxicating liquors is vested exclusively in the Liquor Control Commission. City of Lincoln v. Nebraska Liquor Control Commission, 181 Neb. 277, 147 N.W.2d 803 (1967).

The Liquor Control Commission has the power to regulate all phases of the control of manufacture, distribution, sale, and traffic in intoxicating liquors. State ex rel. Nebraska Beer Wholesalers Assn. v. Young, 153 Neb. 395, 44 N.W.2d 806 (1950).

Liquor Control Commission has power to regulate liquor traffic except as such power is specifically delegated elsewhere. Phelps Inc. v. City of Hastings, 152 Neb. 651, 42 N.W.2d 300 (1950).

Cited in making comparison of powers and duties of Liquor Control Commission with those of heads of executive departments. State ex rel. Johnson v. Chase, 147 Neb. 758, 25 N.W.2d 1 (1946).

The Nebraska Liquor Control Commission is empowered to determine, by reasonable regulations, the hours for sale of beer outside the corporate limits of cities and villages, regardless of its alcoholic content. Griffin v. Gass, 133 Neb. 56, 274 N.W. 193 (1937).

The Nebraska Liquor Control Act empowers the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission to issue a license subject to certain restrictions and conditions, including barring a person with a past history of problems controlling the patrons and the establishment, as long as those conditions or restrictions are reasonably necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people of the State of Nebraska and to promote and foster temperance in the consumption of alcohol. F & T, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Comm., 7 Neb. App. 973, 587 N.W.2d 700 (1998).

A city is not prohibited from adopting reasonable regulations beyond those of the Liquor Control Commission if not in conflict therewith. Bali Hai', Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Commission, 195 Neb. 1, 236 N.W.2d 614 (1975).

Ordinance of city in conflict with Liquor Control Act was unenforceable. State v. Kubik, 159 Neb. 509, 67 N.W.2d 755 (1954).

Despite absence of severance clause, ordinance which provided several distinct and separate grounds upon which to base revocation of liquor licenses was not rendered invalid in its entirety by reason of invalidity of some portions. Clark v. City of Fremont, 377 F.Supp. 327 (D. Neb. 1974).

Where applicant for license not afforded opportunity to explore an issue material to the license, court should direct a new hearing. 72nd Street Pizza, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Commission, 199 Neb. 729, 261 N.W.2d 614 (1978).

Where licensee stored alcoholic beverages in an unauthorized area without permission of the commission and permitted part of licensed premises to be used for gambling, suspension of license was authorized and reasonable. O'Connor v. Nebraska Liquor Control Commission, 191 Neb. 436, 215 N.W.2d 635 (1974).

Rule of Liquor Control Commission prescribing price at which liquors should be sold at retail was unconstitutional. Terry Carpenter, Inc. v. Nebraska Liquor Control Commission, 175 Neb. 26, 120 N.W.2d 374 (1963).