Pastore & Associates, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pastore & Associates, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

194 A.D.2d 409, 599 N.Y.S.2d 541, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6183

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1993·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Order and judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered on or about March 8, 1993, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondent’s determination denying petitioner’s application for an on-premises liquor license and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that respondent’s denial of petitioner’s application "did not simply rest upon a general objection to unsavory past management” of the premises, but legitimately took into account petitioner’s failure to present a security plan adequately addressing respondent’s security con[410] cerns. The efficacy of such operational plans is, of course, subject to respondent’s evaluation, not the court’s (cf., Matter of 135 Rest. Corp. v State Liq. Auth., 25 AD2d 651, 652). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered on or about March 8, 1993, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondent’s determination denying petitioner’s application for an on-premises liquor license and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that respondent’s denial of petitioner’s application "did not simply rest upon a general objection to unsavory past management” of the premises, but legitimately took into account petitioner’s failure to present a security plan adequately addressing respondent’s security con[410] cerns. The efficacy of such operational plans is, of course, subject to respondent’s evaluation, not the court’s (cf., Matter of 135 Rest. Corp. v State Liq. Auth., 25 AD2d 651, 652). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

Pastore & Associates, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority, 194 A.D.2d 409, 599 N.Y.S.2d 541, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6183 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

194 A.D.2d 409 (Pastore & Associates, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related