D. W. M. 1190 Associates, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

49 A.D.2d 557, 370 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10391
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 10, 1975
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 A.D.2d 557 (D. W. M. 1190 Associates, 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
D. W. M. 1190 Associates, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 49 A.D.2d 557, 370 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10391 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Opinion

Determination of respondent [558]*558State Liquor Authority dated February 13, 1975, canceling petitioner’s restaurant liquor license, unanimously modified, on the law and as a matter of discretion, to reduce the sanction to bond forfeiture of $1,000 and suspension for 90 days on condition that James Mosley completely divests himself of his interest in the corporate petitioner, and as modified, confirmed, without costs and disbursements. There was substantial evidence to support the administrative determination finding petitioner licensee guilty of Charges 2 through 5 inclusive. However, the penalty imposed, under the circumstances, constituted an abuse of discretion to the extent indicated herein (CPLR 7803, subd 3). James Mosley and his two brothers, David and Willie Mosley, each hold one third of the corporate stock. The corporate licensee had heretofore an unblemished record. Further, the two brothers of James Mosley were not connected with his activities resulting in his criminal conviction. Under these circumstances, divesture by James Mosley of his corporate holdings consonant with the aforesaid may thus serve as the predicate for reduction of the sanction imposed by respondent. Settle order on notice. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Lupiano, Tilzer and Nunez, JJ.

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

Related

Brandefine v. National Cleaning Contractor, Inc.
265 A.D.2d 441 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 A.D.2d 557, 370 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/d-w-m-1190-associates-inc-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1975.