Club 95, Inc. v. New York State Liqour Authority
Cases that cite this one
15 later published cases cite this decision.
- L. B. R. Enterprises, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
- People v. 229 Restaurant, Inc. (Criminal Court of the City of New York 2003)
- Soca Paradise, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
- P.B.L. Entertainment, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- Barnaby Rudge, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Pepper & Salt Tavern, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Awrich Restaurant, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1983)
- Pro Ben Corp. v. McLaughlin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
- Doherty's New Dorp Tavern v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
- La Vigna Restaurant Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
- Bryan & Rose, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
- Segan Entertainment, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)
- Manhattan Scene, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)
- Beal Properties, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority (N.Y. 1975)
- Oudemool v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1975)
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
Memorandum. Notwithstanding the several self-contradictions and the general unreliability of the testimony of the complaining witness, Spencer, there was substantial evidence to sustain the determination by the Authority, the sole arbiter of the issues of fact (Matter of Radigan v. O’Connell, 304 N. Y. 396, 399; Matter of Avon Bar & Grill v. O’Connell, 301 N. Y. 150, 153). Moreover, where the licensee’s agent is instrumental in creating the disorder, it is generally not necessary to establish a foreseeable pattern of conduct (Matter of Conservative Grouping Corp. v. Epstein, 10 N Y 2d 956; cf. People v. Hawk, 156 Misc. 870, affd. 268 N. Y. 678; contra: Matter of Patterson v. Rohan, 5 A D 2d 870).
Consequently, the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs in all courts, and the determination of the State Liquor Authority reinstated.
Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Keating, Breitel and Jasen concur.
Order reversed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.