Austin Lemontree, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

147 A.D.2d 476, 537 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1501
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 6, 1989
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 147 A.D.2d 476 (Austin Lemontree, 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
Austin Lemontree, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 147 A.D.2d 476, 537 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1501 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinions

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Liquor Authority, dated February 16, 1988, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner guilty of the sale of alcoholic beverages to a minor and suspended the petitioner’s liquor license for 10 days.

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

The determination of the New York State Liquor Authority that the petitioner violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 by selling, delivering or giving away or causing or permitting or procuring to be sold, delivered or given away alcoholic [477]*477beverages to a person under the age of 21 years is supported by substantial evidence. The minor’s presence three feet from the bar where 4 or 5 bartenders were working when the drink was purchased for, and given to, the minor was sufficient to support the conclusion that the petitioner’s illegal conduct was "open, observable and of such nature that its continuance could, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, have been prevented” (Matter of 4373 Tavern Corp. v New York State Liq. Auth., 50 AD2d 855, 856; Matter of Cat & Fiddle v New York State Liq. Auth., 24 AD2d 753; Matter of Park II Villa Corp. v New York State Liq. Auth., 141 AD2d 646; cf., Matter of Panacea Tavern v New York State Liq. Auth., 144 AD2d 562).

The penalty imposed, a 10-day suspension of the petitioner’s liquor license, is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to our sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 233). Brown, J. P., Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Dawson v. New York State Liquor Authority
226 A.D.2d 876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
S & R Lake Lounge, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
661 N.E.2d 1355 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
S & R Lake Lounge, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
209 A.D.2d 420 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Culligan's Pub, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
170 A.D.2d 506 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
Al Ronick, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
157 A.D.2d 656 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Panacea Tavern, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
155 A.D.2d 601 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
MATTER OF AUSTIN LEMONTREE, INC. v. New York State Liquor Auth.
547 N.E.2d 94 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)
Bennigan's of New York, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
151 A.D.2d 747 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
147 A.D.2d 476, 537 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/austin-lemontree-inc-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1989.