Home/New York Court of Appeals/47 Ave. B. East Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

47 Ave. B. East Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

918 N.E.2d 949, 13 N.Y.3d 820
New York Court of Appeals·Decided October 22, 2009·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed with costs, and the petition dismissed. The State Liquor Authority (SLA)’s finding that petitioner permitted overcrowding on the premises in violation of SLA rules was supported by substantial evidence (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc, v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180 [1978]).

Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum; Chief Judge Lippman taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, etc.

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

47 Ave. B. East Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 918 N.E.2d 949, 13 N.Y.3d 820 (N.Y. 2009).

918 N.E.2d 949 (47 Ave. B. East Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of SCE Group Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth.
2018 NY Slip Op 1661 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Matter of Arco Iris Night Club Corp. v. New York State Liq. Auth.
122 A.D.3d 407 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
2169 Central Ltd. v. New York State Liquor Authority
110 A.D.3d 1310 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Shieh
37 Misc. 3d 55 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Braden Food & Drink, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
72 A.D.3d 956 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
47 Ave. B East Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
72 A.D.3d 465 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
MATTER OF 47 AVE. B. EAST INC. v. New York State Liquor Authority
922 N.E.2d 875 (New York Court of Appeals, 2009)