294 Grand Avenue Grocery Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

294 Grand Avenue Grocery Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority

12 A.D.3d 521, 783 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13630

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

DecidedNovember 15, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 12 A.D.3d 521 (294 Grand Avenue Grocery Corp. 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

294 Grand Avenue Grocery Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 12 A.D.3d 521, 783 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13630 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent New York State Liquor Authority, dated November 6, 2002, which adopted the findings of an Administrative Law Judge, dated October 7, 2002, made after a hearing, which found that the petitioner violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) and, inter alia, imposed a $6,000 civil penalty.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

There was substantial evidence to support the determination that the petitioner sold alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21 in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) (see Matter of A.J. & Taylor Rest. v New York State Liq. Auth., [522]*522214 AD2d 727 [1995]; Matter of Culligan’s Pub. v New York State Liq. Auth., 170 AD2d 506 [1991]; Matter of Harry’s Chenango Wine & Liq. v State Liq. Auth. of N.Y., 158 AD2d 804 [1990]). The penalty imposed was not excessive (see Matter of Warehouse Entertainment v New York State Liq. Auth., 292 AD2d 536 [2002]).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Schmidt, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent New York State Liquor Authority, dated November 6, 2002, which adopted the findings of an Administrative Law Judge, dated October 7, 2002, made after a hearing, which found that the petitioner violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) and, inter alia, imposed a $6,000 civil penalty.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

There was substantial evidence to support the determination that the petitioner sold alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21 in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) (see Matter of A.J. & Taylor Rest. v New York State Liq. Auth., [522]*522214 AD2d 727 [1995]; Matter of Culligan’s Pub. v New York State Liq. Auth., 170 AD2d 506 [1991]; Matter of Harry’s Chenango Wine & Liq. v State Liq. Auth. of N.Y., 158 AD2d 804 [1990]). The penalty imposed was not excessive (see Matter of Warehouse Entertainment v New York State Liq. Auth., 292 AD2d 536 [2002]).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Schmidt, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.3d 521, 783 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/294-grand-avenue-grocery-corp-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack