Kaminsky v. State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kaminsky v. State Liquor Authority

39 A.D.2d 609, 330 N.Y.S.2d 966, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4830

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

DecidedApril 20, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 39 A.D.2d 609 (Kaminsky v. 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

Kaminsky v. State Liquor Authority, 39 A.D.2d 609, 330 N.Y.S.2d 966, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4830 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding under CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Broome County) to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority which suspended petitioners’ liquor license for 10 days based on a finding, after a hearing, that one of them sold or delivered or permitted to be sold or delivered an alcoholic beverage to a minor under 18 years of age. Although there was evidence to the contrary, substantial evidence supports the questioned determination since there was proof: that a police officer found four people together in the licensed premises, one of whom was a girl under 18; that a half-finished mixed drink was in front of the girl and a bottle of beer was in front of the other three; that the girl stated the mixed drink was hers and that she consumed part of it; and that one of the licensees admitted that he served the drinks and that the mixed drink was scotch and soda. Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Cooke, Sweeney, Simons and Kane, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding under CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Broome County) to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority which suspended petitioners’ liquor license for 10 days based on a finding, after a hearing, that one of them sold or delivered or permitted to be sold or delivered an alcoholic beverage to a minor under 18 years of age. Although there was evidence to the contrary, substantial evidence supports the questioned determination since there was proof: that a police officer found four people together in the licensed premises, one of whom was a girl under 18; that a half-finished mixed drink was in front of the girl and a bottle of beer was in front of the other three; that the girl stated the mixed drink was hers and that she consumed part of it; and that one of the licensees admitted that he served the drinks and that the mixed drink was scotch and soda. Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Cooke, Sweeney, Simons and Kane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 609, 330 N.Y.S.2d 966, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4830, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kaminsky-v-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1972.