Graca v. State Liquor Authority
| Decision Date | 27 June 1969 |
| Citation | 302 N.Y.S.2d 490,32 A.D.2d 879 |
| Parties | Application of Nadja H. GRACA d/b/a Nadja's Tavern, Appellant-Respondent, v. STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY, Respondent-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Boniello, Gellman, McNulty, Halpern, Anton & Kellick, Harold M. Halpern, Niagara Falls, for appellant-respondent.
Hyman Amsel, New York City, Joseph Reina, Buffalo, for respondent-appellant.
Before GOLDMAN, P.J., and DEL VECCHIO, GABRIELLI, MOULE and HENRY, JJ.
Petitioner appeals from a judgment of Niagara Special Term dismissing her petition to annul respondent's determination which recalled her liquor license for the year beginning October 1, 1967 and to annul respondent's determination of non-renewal of her license for the license year 1968--1969.
When petitioner applied for renewal of her liquor license for the year beginning October 1, 1967 she signed a Renewal Stipulation which recited that because the Authority was unable to examine fully and review adequately her application and because delay in issuing it would create hardship to her, she agreed that in the event the Authority should thereafter determine that the license should not have been renewed it could serve a Notice of Contemplated Recall upon her and in proceedings thereon determine whether the license should have been granted. On March 7, 1968 the Authority served a Notice of Interview on petitioner requesting her to appear for interview in connection with such renewal of her license because of adverse license history in failing to properly display her license; license suspended 7 days for consumption during prohibited hours; refusal to permit inspection by police officers who observed persons consuming beverages at 2:54 a.m.; and because the licensee will not or cannot properly operate the premises so as to prevent violations of law from occurring thereon.
Respondent determined that the 1967--1968 license be recalled and that the application for a 1968--1969 license be denied. The determination was confirmed by the judgment appealed from.
This being a proceeding in the nature of mandamus the standard is not substantiality of evidence but the determination must have a reasonable or rational basis. (Matter of 125 Bar Corp. v. State Liq. Auth., 24 N.Y.2d 174, 299 N.Y.S.2d 194, 247 N.E.2d 157.) Here the determination is based on findings that petitioner had failed to properly display her license on June 23, 1967 but she cooperated and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scherbyn v. Wayne-Finger Lakes Bd. of Co-op. Educational Services
...United Coalition v. Hall, 80 A.D.2d 851, 436 N.Y.S.2d 764, aff'd 54 N.Y.2d 977, 446 N.Y.S.2d 33, 430 N.E.2d 909; Graca v. State Liq. Auth., 32 A.D.2d 879, 302 N.Y.S.2d 490; Rochester Colony v. Hostetter, 19 A.D.2d 250, 241 N.Y.S.2d 210; see generally, 5 NY Jur 2d, Article 78 and Related Pro......
-
Ogdensburg Hotel Corp. v. State Liquor Authority
...license or renewal and, accordingly, the cancellation was arbitrary and capricious and not justified (cf. Matter of Graca v. State Liq. Auth., 32 A.D.2d 879, 880, 302 N.Y.S.2d 490, 492; Matter of Playdium v. O'Connell, 276 App.Div. 14, 16, 93 N.Y.S.2d 46, 48, affd. 301 N.Y. 538, 93 N.E.2d D......
-
English v. Tofany
... ... where he supposed the hearing would be held instead of the State Office Building where the Referee was presiding. At 11:45 a.m. of that ... ...