House of Seagram, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority

New York Court of Appeals

House of Seagram, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority

250 N.E.2d 873, 25 N.Y.2d 865, 303 N.Y.S.2d 880, 1969 N.Y. LEXIS 1114

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 2, 1969

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 250 N.E.2d 873 (House of Seagram, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

House of Seagram, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority, 250 N.E.2d 873, 25 N.Y.2d 865, 303 N.Y.S.2d 880, 1969 N.Y. LEXIS 1114 (N.Y. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In each of the above-entitled proceedings: The court necessarily passed upon the contention of petitioners-appellants that the imposition of a fee for the issuance of a brand label use permit to sell alcoholic beverages, insofar as it covers liquors which are imported from without the State for sale within its borders, constitutes a tax or duty of “ imports ” proscribed by the Import-Export Clause — article I, section 10 — of the United States Constitution and, as indicated by its affirmance “ on the opinion of the Appellate Division in Matter of House of Seagram v. State Liq. Auth. (30 A D 2d 380) ”, found the contention without merit.

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel and Jasen.

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

In each of the above-entitled proceedings: The court necessarily passed upon the contention of petitioners-appellants that the imposition of a fee for the issuance of a brand label use permit to sell alcoholic beverages, insofar as it covers liquors which are imported from without the State for sale within its borders, constitutes a tax or duty of “ imports ” proscribed by the Import-Export Clause — article I, section 10 — of the United States Constitution and, as indicated by its affirmance “ on the opinion of the Appellate Division in Matter of House of Seagram v. State Liq. Auth. (30 A D 2d 380) ”, found the contention without merit.

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel and Jasen.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 N.E.2d 873, 25 N.Y.2d 865, 303 N.Y.S.2d 880, 1969 N.Y. LEXIS 1114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/house-of-seagram-inc-v-state-liquor-authority-ny-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack