Farley v. Aprile
Opinion of the Court
This action was brought by the state commissioner of excise to recover the penalty under a bond executed by defendants, when there was issued to defendant Aprile a liquor tax certificate, by the treasurer of Livingston county. On the trial a jury was waived, and at the conclusion of plaintiff’s case motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that plaintiff had not established a cause of action was made, and decision was reserved pending filing of briefs by counsel.
The plaintiff brings -this action alleging that in his application for a liquor tax certificate defendant Aprile made several false statements, the principal one being that he stated that there were but five dwellings within 300 feet of the place where he proposed to traffic in liquors, whereas, there were nine places within such distance, used exclusively as dwellings.
On the trial it was conceded by defendants that at the time the application for a liquor tax certificate was made there were six houses used exclusively for residence purposes within 300 feet of the place where liquor was to be sold, but defendants contend that the statements in the application were not material false statements.
In view of the concession made on the trial by de
Without considering the apparent inconsistencies in the Liquor Tax Law with reference to the distances saloons must be from buildings occupied exclusively as dwellings—whether an applicant must state the number of such dwellings within 200 or 300 feet of the proposed saloon—it seems to me that the plaintiff must fail in this action under the authority of Farley v. Scherno, 208 N. Y. 269, which is deemed to be controlling in the case at bar. There the -action was brought to recover the penalty of a bond given where a liquor tax certificate was issued to the defendant because as it was claimed he had made false statements in Ms application to the effect that the premises belonged to his wife, whereas they belonged to the United States Government. The court held that the certificate was invalid and void for the reason that no consideration was furnished for the bond sued upon, the certificate having been issued for the sale of liquor on premises belonging to the government and where the state authorities could not authorize liquor to be sold.
Under the circumstances as established by the evidence in this case, it must be held that the liquor tax certificate issued to defendant Aprile, on an application which on its face showed that the necessary number of consents had not been obtained, was invalid and void, and that being so no consideration was furnished for the bond, and consequently this action cannot be maintained. Farley v. Scherno, supra.
Judgment is, therefore, directed dismissing the complaint, with costs.
Judgment accordingly.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.