Zenith Wine & Liquor, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zenith Wine & Liquor, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority

91 A.D.2d 666, 457 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19536

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 91 A.D.2d 666 (Zenith Wine & Liquor, Inc. 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

Zenith Wine & Liquor, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority, 91 A.D.2d 666, 457 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19536 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of respondent to suspend petitioner’s package store retail liquor license for 10 days, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Adler, J.), dated December 21, 1981, which granted the application to the extent of reducing the suspension to one day and directed that the order of suspension need not be posted or publicly displayed. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The one-day suspension shall become effective in accordance with the dictates of 9 NYCRR 54.7. The penalty imposed by the appellant for a technical violation was so disproportionate to the offense in light of all the circumstances to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 223). Titone, J. P., Gibbons, Thompson and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of respondent to suspend petitioner’s package store retail liquor license for 10 days, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Adler, J.), dated December 21, 1981, which granted the application to the extent of reducing the suspension to one day and directed that the order of suspension need not be posted or publicly displayed. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The one-day suspension shall become effective in accordance with the dictates of 9 NYCRR 54.7. The penalty imposed by the appellant for a technical violation was so disproportionate to the offense in light of all the circumstances to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 223). Titone, J. P., Gibbons, Thompson and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 A.D.2d 666, 457 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zenith-wine-liquor-inc-v-state-liquor-authority-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack