Pearson v. State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pearson v. State Liquor Authority

32 A.D.2d 837, 302 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3545

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

DecidedJune 30, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.2d 837 (Pearson 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

Pearson v. State Liquor Authority, 32 A.D.2d 837, 302 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3545 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to review respondent’s determination dated January 12, 1967, which suspended petitioner’s summer beer license for 20 days and demanded payment of $500 on petitioner’s bond, with the suspension temporarily deferred upon payment of the bond demand. Determination modified, on the law, by reducing the bond demand to $100, and confirmed as so modified, without costs. No questions of fact were considered. In our opinion, under the circumstances herein, [838]*838the imposition of a bond demand for more than $100, in addition to the suspension of the license, was not warranted. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to review respondent’s determination dated January 12, 1967, which suspended petitioner’s summer beer license for 20 days and demanded payment of $500 on petitioner’s bond, with the suspension temporarily deferred upon payment of the bond demand. Determination modified, on the law, by reducing the bond demand to $100, and confirmed as so modified, without costs. No questions of fact were considered. In our opinion, under the circumstances herein, [838]*838the imposition of a bond demand for more than $100, in addition to the suspension of the license, was not warranted. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.2d 837, 302 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pearson-v-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1969.