From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

We Restaurant, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 1991
175 A.D.2d 165 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

July 8, 1991


Adjudged that the petition is granted, on the law, without costs or disbursements, to the extent that the penalty imposed is annulled, the proceeding is otherwise dismissed, and the matter is remitted to the respondent New York State Liquor Authority for the imposition of a new penalty not to exceed (1) a $1,000 bond forfeiture, and (2) a suspension of the petitioner's liquor license for not more than 60 days.

Contrary to the petitioner's contentions, there was substantial evidence supporting the respondent's determination (1) that alcoholic beverages were served to a person under the age of 21 years old, and (2) that the petitioner allowed the premises to become disorderly by permitting or suffering the use of marihuana on the premises. There was substantial evidence supporting the respondent's finding that the petitioner failed to provide adequate supervision at its establishment. Significantly, we have held that a licensee "may be charged with the knowledge it would have obtained through the exercise of reasonable diligence in supervising the licensed premises" (Matter of Mack Conroy, Inc. v Duffy, 155 A.D.2d 665, 665-666; Matter of P.M. Entertainment Indus. v State Liq. Auth., 114 A.D.2d 457, 458-459, affd 67 N.Y.2d 834).

While the petitioner takes issue with the testimony of several witnesses who appeared on the respondent's behalf, the Administrative Law Judge, having seen and heard the witnesses testify, was in the best position to assess their credibility, and we see no reason to disturb that determination on the record before us (see, e.g., Matter of CBH Pioneer Enters. v New York State Liq. Auth., 172 A.D.2d 520).

We find, however, that the penalty was so excessive that, under the circumstances, the penalty must be annulled and the matter remitted to the respondent for imposition of a new penalty not to exceed a 60-day suspension of the petitioner's license and a $1,000 bond forfeiture (see, Matter of CBH Pioneer Enters. v New York State Liq. Auth., supra). Kooper, J.P., Sullivan, Lawrence and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

We Restaurant, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 1991
175 A.D.2d 165 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

We Restaurant, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of WE RESTAURANT, INC., Petitioner, v. NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR…

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

Date published: Jul 8, 1991

Citations

175 A.D.2d 165 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
572 N.Y.S.2d 55

Citing Cases

Mtr. of Rumors Disco v. N.Y. St. Liquor Auth

In addition, we reject the petitioner's assertion that it was substantially prejudiced because the proposed…

Matter of Perry v. New York St. Liquor Auth

The Administrative Law Judge found that the SLA failed to establish that the licensee permitted disorderly…