Lakeside Country Club, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lakeside Country Club, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

34 A.D.2d 1100, 313 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4277

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

DecidedJune 30, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.2d 1100 (Lakeside Country Club, 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

Lakeside Country Club, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 34 A.D.2d 1100, 313 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4277 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination unanimously modified on the facts and in the exercise of discretion in accordance with the memorandum herein, and as so modified confirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner, a membership club, made a written contract with a man and his wife to manage its restaurant and bar, by the terms of which after payment of certain expenses they were to receive the proceeds of the restaurant and 95% of the proceeds of the bar. Respondent Authority canceled petitioner’s license, after a hearing, for violation of section 111 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law on the ground that petitioner permitted one who is not mentioned in its license to avail himself of it. Petitioner admitted entering into the agreement in 1969 after losing money in 1967 and 1968 in this operation and after being advised by legal counsel that such an arrangement was proper. The agreement was for the 1969 season only and had terminated before the hearing on January 22, 1970. While there was a violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law which was not intended, no advantage or harm resulted, and it has ceased to exist. In view of the demonstrated good faith of petitioner cancellation of its license under these circumstances was so disproportionate to the offense as to constitute an abuse of discretion on the part of the respondent State Liquor Authority (Matter of 230 Green Rest. Corp. v. State Liq. Auth., 32 A D 2d 898, affd. 27 N Y 2d 606). The penalty should be reduced to a suspension of the license for a period of 10 days. (Review of determination canceling liquor license, transferred by order of Monroe Special Term.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Marsh, Witmer, Moule and Henry, JJ.

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

Determination unanimously modified on the facts and in the exercise of discretion in accordance with the memorandum herein, and as so modified confirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner, a membership club, made a written contract with a man and his wife to manage its restaurant and bar, by the terms of which after payment of certain expenses they were to receive the proceeds of the restaurant and 95% of the proceeds of the bar. Respondent Authority canceled petitioner’s license, after a hearing, for violation of section 111 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law on the ground that petitioner permitted one who is not mentioned in its license to avail himself of it. Petitioner admitted entering into the agreement in 1969 after losing money in 1967 and 1968 in this operation and after being advised by legal counsel that such an arrangement was proper. The agreement was for the 1969 season only and had terminated before the hearing on January 22, 1970. While there was a violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law which was not intended, no advantage or harm resulted, and it has ceased to exist. In view of the demonstrated good faith of petitioner cancellation of its license under these circumstances was so disproportionate to the offense as to constitute an abuse of discretion on the part of the respondent State Liquor Authority (Matter of 230 Green Rest. Corp. v. State Liq. Auth., 32 A D 2d 898, affd. 27 N Y 2d 606). The penalty should be reduced to a suspension of the license for a period of 10 days. (Review of determination canceling liquor license, transferred by order of Monroe Special Term.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Marsh, Witmer, Moule and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 1100, 313 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lakeside-country-club-inc-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1970.