Boro Rendezvous, Inc. v. O'Connell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Boro Rendezvous, Inc. v. O'Connell

283 A.D. 718, 127 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 1954

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D. 718 (Boro Rendezvous, Inc. v. O'Connell) 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

Boro Rendezvous, Inc. v. O'Connell, 283 A.D. 718, 127 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding Trader article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority which denied the application of the petitioners, two New York corporations, for renewals of liquor licenses on the ground that their principal stockholder is not a fit and proper person to hold a license. The State Liquor Authority appeals from the order made at Special Term which annuls its determination and, in effect, grants the licenses. Order reversed on the law, without costs, proceeding dismissed, without costs, and determination of the State Liquor Authority confirmed. In our opinion, the determination of the State Liquor Authority is not arbitrary or capricious but is based on substantial evidence. Nolan, P. J., Adel, Wenzel, MacCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding Trader article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority which denied the application of the petitioners, two New York corporations, for renewals of liquor licenses on the ground that their principal stockholder is not a fit and proper person to hold a license. The State Liquor Authority appeals from the order made at Special Term which annuls its determination and, in effect, grants the licenses. Order reversed on the law, without costs, proceeding dismissed, without costs, and determination of the State Liquor Authority confirmed. In our opinion, the determination of the State Liquor Authority is not arbitrary or capricious but is based on substantial evidence. Nolan, P. J., Adel, Wenzel, MacCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D. 718, 127 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boro-rendezvous-inc-v-oconnell-nyappdiv-1954.