Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

In the Matter of SARA B. LEVINE, Doing Business as Supreme Wine Liquor Company, Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY et al., Respondents.

Order reversed and matter remitted to Special Term for further proceedings not inconsistent with the following memorandum, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division: The record is inadequate to establish a reasonable or rational basis for the State Liquor Authority's conclusion that the issuance of a license to the applicant would promote the "public convenience and advantage" ( Matter of Forman v. New York State Liq. Auth., 17 N.Y.2d 224; Matter of Sinacore v. New York State Liq. Auth., 21 N.Y.2d 379).

Concur: Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, KEATING and JASEN. Chief Judge FULD and Judges BERGAN and BREITEL dissent and vote to affirm on the ground that the record shows prospective development of a large housing project in the area and it was, therefore, within the province of the Authority to determine that granting of the application satisfied the standards of public convenience and advantage. Consequently, this case is distinguishable from Matter of Forman v. New York State Liq. Auth. ( 21 N.Y.2d 984).

Motion for a stay denied.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

IN RE LEVINE
(Apr 18, 1968)