Little Dutch Grill, Inc. v. O'Connell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Little Dutch Grill, Inc. v. O'Connell

281 A.D. 901, 119 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3727

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 23, 1953·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review the determination of the State Liquor Authority in refusing to renew a restaurant liquor license, petitioner appeals from an order denying’ the application and dismissing' the proceeding. Order unanimously affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The Authority’s findings that the premises were disorderly and that alcoholic beverages had been sold to a minor while intoxicated were sustained by substantial evidence. While some of the proof consisted of unsworn statements and reports and was hearsay, the evidence was admitted without objection and so could be considered by the Authority. (Cf. Flora V. Garbean, 38 N. Y. Ill; People ex rol. McLaughlin v. Board of Police Comrs., 174 N. Y. 450, 456; Matter of Whalen v. Gorsi, 279 App. Div. 1113.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Wenzel, MaeCfate and Schmidt, JJ.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review the determination of the State Liquor Authority in refusing to renew a restaurant liquor license, petitioner appeals from an order denying’ the application and dismissing' the proceeding. Order unanimously affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The Authority’s findings that the premises were disorderly and that alcoholic beverages had been sold to a minor while intoxicated were sustained by substantial evidence. While some of the proof consisted of unsworn statements and reports and was hearsay, the evidence was admitted without objection and so could be considered by the Authority. (Cf. Flora V. Garbean, 38 N. Y. Ill; People ex rol. McLaughlin v. Board of Police Comrs., 174 N. Y. 450, 456; Matter of Whalen v. Gorsi, 279 App. Div. 1113.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Wenzel, MaeCfate and Schmidt, JJ.

Little Dutch Grill, Inc. v. O'Connell, 281 A.D. 901, 119 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3727 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

281 A.D. 901 (Little Dutch Grill, Inc. v. O'Connell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related