Loughlin v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Loughlin v. New York State Liquor Authority

46 A.D.2d 610, 359 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4021

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

DecidedOctober 8, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 46 A.D.2d 610 (Loughlin 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

Loughlin v. New York State Liquor Authority, 46 A.D.2d 610, 359 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4021 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority, made on May 7, 1974, which canceled petitioner’s restaurant liquor license issued for premises 140 Seventh Avenue, New York City, and directed forfeiture of the $1,000 bond. Determination unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of annulling such cancellation and substituting therefor a provision that petitioner’s license be suspended for a period of three months; and as so modified, the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements. In our opinion, upon the record before us, cancellation of petitioner’s license was so disproportionate to petitioner’s offense as to constitute an abuse of discretion; and the penalty should have been limited to the suspension and bond claim as indicated herein. Concur — Nunez, J. P., Kupferman, Murphy, Lupiano and Tilzer, JJ.

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

Proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority, made on May 7, 1974, which canceled petitioner’s restaurant liquor license issued for premises 140 Seventh Avenue, New York City, and directed forfeiture of the $1,000 bond. Determination unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of annulling such cancellation and substituting therefor a provision that petitioner’s license be suspended for a period of three months; and as so modified, the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements. In our opinion, upon the record before us, cancellation of petitioner’s license was so disproportionate to petitioner’s offense as to constitute an abuse of discretion; and the penalty should have been limited to the suspension and bond claim as indicated herein. Concur — Nunez, J. P., Kupferman, Murphy, Lupiano and Tilzer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 A.D.2d 610, 359 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4021, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loughlin-v-new-york-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1974.