Salem Inn, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
Cases that cite this one
10 later published cases cite this decision.
- Highway Tavern Corp. v. McLaughlin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Blau-Par Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- La Maison De Sade, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
- Vanda Hodge Pub, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- Michael Frank of Jericho, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- Richmond Gentlemen, Inc. v. State of New York Liquor Authoity (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- 92-07 Restaurant, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
- New York State Liquor Authority v. Salem Social Club, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1980)
- Colon v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
- TJPC Restaurant Corp. v. State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1978)
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.
Order reversed and determination of State Liquor Authority reinstated, with costs.
The hearing officer specifically found that on two occasions during the course of nude dancing by performers at the licensee’s premises the licensee suffered or permitted disorderly conduct by reason of the dancer’s engagement in lewd and indecent acts. In adopting the hearing officer’s findings, the authority found that the performances were lewd and indecent per se and therefore in violation of section 106 of the Alcoholic Beverages Control Law (compare Matter of Beale Props, v State Liq. Auth., 37 NY2d 861, with Matter of Inside Straight v State Liq. Auth., 56 AD2d 720, mot for lv to app den 41 NY2d 806; Matter of Rubinoff v State Liq. Auth., 53 AD2d 943, mot for lv to app den 40 NY2d 802).
An examination of the record discloses that there was substantial evidence to support the authority’s findings. The temporal duration of the lewd and indecent acts and the lack of direct contact between performers and patrons were but circumstances for consideration by the fact finders in making their determination (cf. Matter of Streber v State of New York Liq. Auth., 47 AD2d 808, 809).
It is not necessary to reach appellant’s constitutional arguments because the basis for the authority’s determination and this court’s reinstatement of the determination is the substantial evidence of lewd conduct suffered, conduct unprotected by constitutional limitations.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.
Order reversed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.