Martin v. State Liquor Authority
| Decision Date | 07 January 1965 |
| Citation | 256 N.Y.S.2d 336,15 N.Y.2d 707,204 N.E.2d 496 |
| Parties | , 204 N.E.2d 496 Vlasta MARTIN et al., Appellants, v. STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County, 43 Misc.2d 682, 252 N.Y.S.2d 365.
The owners of two retail liquor package stores, on behalf of themselves and all other licensed owners of such stores, brought action against the State Liquor Authority for a declaratory judgment that Sections 13 and 14 of Chapter 531 of the Laws of 1964 are invalid and for injunctive relief. Section 13 repealed the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, Consol.Laws, c. 3-B, § 105, subds. 4, 4-a, providing that no retail license to sell liquor or wine for off-premises consumption shall be granted in cities having a population of 1,000,000 or more for any premises which shall be located within 1,500 feet of any premises holding a similar license on the same street or avenue, and that elsewhere, no such license may be granted for premises which are located within 700 feet of any other premises so licensed on the same street or avenue, and providing that the State Liquor Authority can permit, in its discretion, premises first licensed prior to January 1, 1941 to be removed not to exceed 100 feet in order to carry out or improve the purpose of Subdivision 4, notwithstanding the provisions of Subdivision 4. Section 14 provides that nothing contained in Section 13 of the Act shall be construed as impairing or affecting the power of the State Liquor Authority to determine, in accordance with other provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, whether public convenience and advantage will be promoted by the issuance of licenses to traffic in alcoholic beverages, the increase or decrease in the number thereof, and the location of premises licensed thereby.
The Special Term, Lawrence H. Cooke, J., entered judgment for the State Liquor Authority and held that Sections 13 and 14 are not unconstitutional as an unlawful delegation of legislative power to the State Liquor Authority on ground that they fail to prescribe sufficient standards for exercise of power granted to State Liquor Authority.
The owners of the licenses appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that Sections 13 and 14 are an unlawful delegation of legislative authority in violation of Section 1 of Article III of the New York State Constitution.
Charles B. Torche, Albany, for appellants.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boreali v. Axelrod
... ... David M. AXELROD, as Commissioner of the New York State ... Department of Health, et al., Appellants ... Court of Appeals of ... Council overstepped the boundaries of its lawfully delegated authority when it promulgated a comprehensive code to govern tobacco smoking in ... [71 N.Y.2d 11] necessity"; "best interests of racing generally"]; Martin v. State Liq. Auth., 15 N.Y.2d 707, 256 N.Y.S.2d 336, 204 N.E.2d 496 ... ...
-
Circus Disco Ltd. v. New York State Liquor Authority
...457, 209 N.E.2d 788; Martin v. State Liq. Auth., 43 Misc.2d 682, 252 N.Y.S.2d 365 (Cooke, J.), affd. on opn. below 15 N.Y.2d 707, 256 N.Y.S.2d 336, 204 N.E.2d 496) than to the factors here considered by the authority-the proximity of a school and churches; the possibility of noise disturbin......
-
City of Amsterdam v. Helsby
... ... Relations Board of the State of New York, et al., ... Appellants ... CITY OF BUFFALO, Appellant, ... that the Home Rule powers will sustain an exercise of local authority with respect to the regulation of the hours of work, compensation, and so ... (Martin v. State Liq. Auth., 43 Misc.2d 682, 685, 252 N.Y.S.2d 365, 368 (Cooke, ... ...
-
82 Hawai'i 329, Herrick, Application of
...legislative policy which entitles him to have it remain unaltered for his benefit[.]") (citations omitted), affirmed, 15 N.Y.2d 707, 256 N.Y.S.2d 336, 204 N.E.2d 496 (1965). "The power to enact necessarily implies the power to repeal and one Legislature cannot be limited or bound by the act......