2568-69, 45 L.Ed.2d 648 (1975); Seagram & Sons v. Hostetter, 384 U.S. 35, 41, 86 S.Ct. 1254, 1258, 16 L.Ed.2d 336 (1966); Castlewood International Corp. v. Miller, 626 F.2d 1200 (5th Cir. 1980); Blatnik Co. v. Ketola, 587 F.2d 379, 381-82 (8th Cir. 1978); Richter v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 559 F.2d 1168, 1170 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1046, 98 S.Ct. 891, 54 L.Ed.2d 797 (1978); Woods v. Alcoholic Beverage Appeals Board, 502 F.Supp. 528, 530 (C.D.Cal.1980); Dunagin v. City of Oxford, 489 F.Supp. 763, 772 (N.D. Miss. 1980), appeal pending, No. 80-2762 (5th Cir. 1981); DieBurg, Inc. v. Underhill, 465 F.Supp. 1176, 1177 (M.D.Fla.1979); Felix v. Milliken, 463 F.Supp. 1360, 1375 (E.D.Mich. 1978). 14 . See The Licenses Cases 5 How. 504, 579, 12 L.Ed. 256 (1847) (<HOLDING>); Joseph S. Finch & Co. v. McKittrick, 305 U.S.
recognizing a state agencys powers are limited to 1 recognizing broad powers of state government to regulate alcohol within their borders holding that state court could regulate the practice of law in federal courts located in the state recognizing the municipal authority to regulate traffic implies broad authority recognizing that the exercise of zoning authority within a home rule citys municipal borders is a matter of local concern