C & C Tavern, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

C & C Tavern, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

179 A.D.2d 547, 579 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 711

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

DecidedJanuary 23, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 179 A.D.2d 547 (C & C Tavern, 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

C & C Tavern, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 179 A.D.2d 547, 579 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 711 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

The testimony of an undercover police officer concerning the circumstances of her purchase of cocaine on the premises, and the police laboratory report, were properly admitted in evidence.

Substantial evidence supports respondent’s determination that petitioner’s principal had sold, or at least permitted the sale of cocaine on the premises, and thus permitted the premises to become disorderly in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 106 (6). And, given this selling of drugs on the premises, the penalty was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

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

The testimony of an undercover police officer concerning the circumstances of her purchase of cocaine on the premises, and the police laboratory report, were properly admitted in evidence.

Substantial evidence supports respondent’s determination that petitioner’s principal had sold, or at least permitted the sale of cocaine on the premises, and thus permitted the premises to become disorderly in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 106 (6). And, given this selling of drugs on the premises, the penalty was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 A.D.2d 547, 579 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-c-tavern-inc-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack