Wager v. State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wager v. State Liquor Authority

3 A.D.2d 934, 163 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5430

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

DecidedMay 20, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 934 (Wager 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

Wager v. State Liquor Authority, 3 A.D.2d 934, 163 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5430 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority, which denied an application to renew a solicitor’s permit, the appeal is from an order of the Special Term annulling the determination and directing the issuance of the permit. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldock, Murphy and Hallinan, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to dismiss the proceeding, being of the opinion that, on the record presented, it should not be held that the State Liquor Authority acted arbitrarily or capriciously. Such being the ease, the court should not substitute its judgment for that of the Authority. Kleinfeld, J., not voting.

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

In a proceeding to review a determination of the State Liquor Authority, which denied an application to renew a solicitor’s permit, the appeal is from an order of the Special Term annulling the determination and directing the issuance of the permit. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldock, Murphy and Hallinan, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to dismiss the proceeding, being of the opinion that, on the record presented, it should not be held that the State Liquor Authority acted arbitrarily or capriciously. Such being the ease, the court should not substitute its judgment for that of the Authority. Kleinfeld, J., not voting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 934, 163 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wager-v-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1957.