In re Hanson

2 Liquor Tax Rep. 329
New York Supreme Court·Decided June 15, 1900·Published

Opinion

Leventritt, J.

It is quite apparent from the survey that the required number of consents within the prohibited distance has not been secured. Even could the respondent’s erroneous claim of measurements be accepted, it would still remain that several of the improperly acknowledged consents necessary to make the requisite two-thirds have been obtained by fraud and misrepresentation and must, therefore,0 be disregarded. . The misstatements were willful and of material facts and compel a revocation of the certificate. (Kessler v. Cashin, L. J., June 11, 1900.) The application is granted as of the date of the filing of the petition. (Lyman v. Monahan, 28 Misc. 408, 48 App. Div. 275.)

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

In re Hanson, 2 Liquor Tax Rep. 329 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1900).

2 Liquor Tax Rep. 329 (In re Hanson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Lyman
48 A.D. 275 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
In re Lyman
28 Misc. 408 (New York Supreme Court, 1899)