Albany Manor, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- Sherwyn Toppin Marketing Consultants, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Sherwyn Toppin Marketing Consultants, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Matter of Lawrence Union Free Sch. Dist. v. New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Matter of Last Train Stop, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- Matter of Bracco's Clam & Oyster Bar, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- Matter of Clan Fitz, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Matter of Arco Iris Night Club Corp. v. New York State Liq. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Willis v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Willis v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- S & S Pub, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- S & S Pub, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review so much of a determination of the New York State Liquor Authority, dated April 25, 2006, as adopted the findings of an Administrative Law Judge, dated February 14, 2006, made after a hearing, which found that the petitioner violated, inter alia, Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 106 (5) and issued a 10-day suspension and imposed an $8,000 civil penalty.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
Judicial review of an administrative determination made after a hearing required by law, and at which evidence was taken, is limited to whether that determination is supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Jennings v New York State Off. of Mental Health, 90 NY2d 227, 239 [1997]; Matter of Superior Officers Assn. of Police Dept. of County of Nassau, Inc. v State of N.Y. Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 23 AD3d 481 [2005]). Substantial evidence has been defined as “such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact” (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180 [1978]).
Here, substantial evidence supports the findings of the New York State Liquor Authority that the petitioner sold alcohol after hours, permitted consumption of alcohol on its premises after hours, and allowed dancing to occur on its premises without a New York City Cabaret license (see Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 106 [5]; §§ 118, 54.3). The penalty imposed was not excessive. Accordingly, the determination must be confirmed.
The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Spolzino, J.P., Krausman, Fisher and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.