Chaleco Restaurant Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chaleco Restaurant Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority

27 A.D.2d 829, 281 N.Y.S.2d 968, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4580

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

DecidedMarch 21, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 27 A.D.2d 829 (Chaleco Restaurant Corp. 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

Chaleco Restaurant Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 27 A.D.2d 829, 281 N.Y.S.2d 968, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4580 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of the State Liquor Authority revoking petitioner’s restaurant license, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of dismissing charges 2 and 4, and as so modified the determination is otherwise confirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Charges 2 and 4 are time-barred under section 118 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law. (Matter of Benjamin v. State Liq. Auth., 13 N Y 2d 227; Matter of Hacker v. State Liq. Auth., 21 A D 2d 755; Matter of Vilabar Cafe v. State Liq. Auth., 25 A D 2d 662; Matter of Ritor Rest. Corp. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 27 A D 2d 710.) The findings on charges 1, 3 and 5 are supported by substantial evidence. We find no reason for disturbing the penalty of revocation. Concur—Steuer, J. P., Tilzer, Rabin, McNally and Staley, Jr., JJ.

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

Determination of the State Liquor Authority revoking petitioner’s restaurant license, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of dismissing charges 2 and 4, and as so modified the determination is otherwise confirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Charges 2 and 4 are time-barred under section 118 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law. (Matter of Benjamin v. State Liq. Auth., 13 N Y 2d 227; Matter of Hacker v. State Liq. Auth., 21 A D 2d 755; Matter of Vilabar Cafe v. State Liq. Auth., 25 A D 2d 662; Matter of Ritor Rest. Corp. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 27 A D 2d 710.) The findings on charges 1, 3 and 5 are supported by substantial evidence. We find no reason for disturbing the penalty of revocation. Concur—Steuer, J. P., Tilzer, Rabin, McNally and Staley, Jr., JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.2d 829, 281 N.Y.S.2d 968, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chaleco-restaurant-corp-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1967.