From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of 27 Tavern v. State Liquor Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 8, 1987
133 A.D.2d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

October 8, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anita Florio, J.).


As reflected by the transcript of the disciplinary hearing, the charge that petitioner suffered or permitted gambling on the licensed premises in violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law was well documented. Only the penalty imposed is at issue. We agree with the court of first instance that the sanction, i.e., cancellation of petitioner's license, in addition to a $1,000 bond forfeiture, is so excessive and so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness. (See, Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 233.) This was petitioner's first and only offense in an otherwise unblemished 14-year record. The offending video game machine was removed and the numbers pool, which was primarily intended to, and did, in fact, raise money for charity, discontinued upon notice of the charges. At the time, more than $6,700 had been donated to two charitable organizations. A like amount had been divided among the participants, whose number was limited to 100. Cancellation would entail the forfeiture of the refund value of the balance of petitioner's three-year, $5,000 license fee; result in the loss of livelihood for petitioner's principal and its two bartenders, who have been in its employ for approximately 7 and 6 years, respectively; and subject petitioner to a potential liability of at least $650 per month until April 1989 on a lease that will be rendered virtually worthless. In such circumstances, and taking into account the nature of the violation involved, cancellation would be draconian. Suspension and bond forfeiture is the more appropriate measure of penalty. The extent of such suspension, however, is a matter which, in the first instance, is best left to the discretion of the agency, not the court, and we remand for reconsideration of the appropriate penalty, which should not, in our view, exceed a 60-day suspension. (See, Rob Tess Rest. Corp. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 49 N.Y.2d 874, 876.)

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Asch, Rosenberger, Wallach and Smith, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of 27 Tavern v. State Liquor Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 8, 1987
133 A.D.2d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Matter of 27 Tavern v. State Liquor Auth

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of 27 TAVERN, INC., Respondent, v. STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 8, 1987

Citations

133 A.D.2d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Mahr v. Duffy

Revocation here would entail the loss of petitioners' livelihood. Given this circumstance, coupled with…

Matter of Georgian Motel v. N.Y. St. Liquor

Accordingly, we agree with Supreme Court that the penalty imposed must be annulled. The appropriate…