Sorrentino v. O'Connell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sorrentino v. O'Connell

285 A.D. 1057, 139 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6660

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

DecidedApril 4, 1955

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 285 A.D. 1057 (Sorrentino v. O'Connell) 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

Sorrentino v. O'Connell, 285 A.D. 1057, 139 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority canceling a restaurant liquor license, transferred to this court pursuant to section 1296 of said Act. Petitioner also prays for an order directing respondents to renew said license for the period March 1, 1955, to February 29, 1956. The license was cancelled on findings that (1) the premises had ceased to be operated as a bona fide restaurant; (2) adequate books and records were not maintained, and (3) the licensee knowingly employed a disqualified person, a convicted felon. Determination annulled, without costs, and matter remitted to respondents for reconsideration and action not inconsistent herewith. We are of the opinion that above finding (1) is proper; that finding (2) is supported by some proof, and that finding (3) is improper because it is not supported by sufficient evidence. The matter is remitted to respondents to consider in the first instance whether there is a substantial basis for refusal to permit the continuance of the licensed premises. (Matter of Norton v. O’Connell, 282 App. Div. 744, appeal dismissed 306 N. Y. 843.) Nolan, P. J., MacCrate, Schmidt, Murphy and Ughetta, 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 Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority canceling a restaurant liquor license, transferred to this court pursuant to section 1296 of said Act. Petitioner also prays for an order directing respondents to renew said license for the period March 1, 1955, to February 29, 1956. The license was cancelled on findings that (1) the premises had ceased to be operated as a bona fide restaurant; (2) adequate books and records were not maintained, and (3) the licensee knowingly employed a disqualified person, a convicted felon. Determination annulled, without costs, and matter remitted to respondents for reconsideration and action not inconsistent herewith. We are of the opinion that above finding (1) is proper; that finding (2) is supported by some proof, and that finding (3) is improper because it is not supported by sufficient evidence. The matter is remitted to respondents to consider in the first instance whether there is a substantial basis for refusal to permit the continuance of the licensed premises. (Matter of Norton v. O’Connell, 282 App. Div. 744, appeal dismissed 306 N. Y. 843.) Nolan, P. J., MacCrate, Schmidt, Murphy and Ughetta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D. 1057, 139 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sorrentino-v-oconnell-nyappdiv-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack