260 Lounge, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

260 Lounge, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

38 A.D.2d 700, 328 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5519

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 25, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.2d 700 (260 Lounge, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

260 Lounge, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 38 A.D.2d 700, 328 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5519 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR to review determinations of the State Liquor Authority dated October 8, 1971, canceling the special on-premises liquor licenses issued to petitioners. Determinations unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of annulling said cancellations and substituting therefor a provision that the licenses of petitioners be suspended for 30 days and in the case of petitioner 260 Lounge, Inc., that in addition there be a forfeiture of bond; and as so modified, the determinations are confirmed, without costs and without disbursements. In our opinion, upon the record before us, cancellation of petitioners’ licenses was so disproportionate to the offenses committed by petitioners as to constitute an abuse of discretion, and the penalties should have been limited to the suspensions and forfeiture of bond as indicated herein. Concur — Nunez, J. P., Kupferman, Murphy, Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR to review determinations of the State Liquor Authority dated October 8, 1971, canceling the special on-premises liquor licenses issued to petitioners. Determinations unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of annulling said cancellations and substituting therefor a provision that the licenses of petitioners be suspended for 30 days and in the case of petitioner 260 Lounge, Inc., that in addition there be a forfeiture of bond; and as so modified, the determinations are confirmed, without costs and without disbursements. In our opinion, upon the record before us, cancellation of petitioners’ licenses was so disproportionate to the offenses committed by petitioners as to constitute an abuse of discretion, and the penalties should have been limited to the suspensions and forfeiture of bond as indicated herein. Concur — Nunez, J. P., Kupferman, Murphy, Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 700, 328 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/260-lounge-inc-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1972.