Anak Wine & Liquor Co. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anak Wine & Liquor Co. v. New York State Liquor Authority

30 A.D.2d 962, 294 N.Y.S.2d 987, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3229

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 7, 1968·Published

Opinion

In a proceeding under section 123 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 20, 1967, which (a) annulled a determination of the -appellant Authority approving the issuance of a package store license to appellant Murray Wine & Liquor, Inc., for certain premises; and (b) enjoined the issuance of such license and the operation of a package liquor store -by appellant Murray Wine & Liquor, Inc., at said premises. Order reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs, payable jointly to appellants filing separate briefs; determination of the Authority confirmed; and proceeding dismissed. No questions of fact were considered on this appeal. In our opinion, the record discloses a rational basis for the Authority’s determination that the license should be issued. Hence, the courts may not disturb it (see Matter of Sinacore v. New York State Liq. Auth., 21 N Y 2d 379). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur. [53 Misc 2d 924.]

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

In a proceeding under section 123 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 20, 1967, which (a) annulled a determination of the -appellant Authority approving the issuance of a package store license to appellant Murray Wine & Liquor, Inc., for certain premises; and (b) enjoined the issuance of such license and the operation of a package liquor store -by appellant Murray Wine & Liquor, Inc., at said premises. Order reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs, payable jointly to appellants filing separate briefs; determination of the Authority confirmed; and proceeding dismissed. No questions of fact were considered on this appeal. In our opinion, the record discloses a rational basis for the Authority’s determination that the license should be issued. Hence, the courts may not disturb it (see Matter of Sinacore v. New York State Liq. Auth., 21 N Y 2d 379). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur. [53 Misc 2d 924.]

Anak Wine & Liquor Co. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 30 A.D.2d 962, 294 N.Y.S.2d 987, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3229 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

30 A.D.2d 962 (Anak Wine & Liquor Co. v. New York State Liquor Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related