From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter, S.T.A., Fredonia v. N.Y.S. Liq. A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 30, 1999
267 A.D.2d 1037 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

December 30, 1999

Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed.

PRESENT: LAWTON, J. P., HAYES, WISNER, HURLBUTT AND SCUDDER, JJ.


Memorandum:

Contrary to the contention of petitioner, the determination that it violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 Alco. Bev. Cont.(1) by selling alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of 21 years is supported by substantial evidence, i.e., the public safety officer's hearsay testimony and the statement signed by the minor in question ( see, Matter of Gray v. Adduci, 73 N.Y.2d 741, 742-743). We reject the contention of petitioner that the prior written statement of the minor could be used only to impeach his testimony pursuant to CPLR 4514. The testimony of the minor that he could not recall whether he had been served alcohol was not inconsistent with his prior written statement. Finally, by failing to submit any proof that it reasonably relied upon photographic identification of the minor, petitioner failed to sustain its burden of proving that affirmative defense ( see, Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 Alco. Bev. Cont.[4]; Matter of Dark Horse Tavern v. New York State Liq. Auth., 232 A.D.2d 947, 948). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Burns, J.)


Summaries of

Matter, S.T.A., Fredonia v. N.Y.S. Liq. A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 30, 1999
267 A.D.2d 1037 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter, S.T.A., Fredonia v. N.Y.S. Liq. A.

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF S.T.A. OF FREDONIA, INC., D/B/A SUNNY'S, PETITIONER, v. NEW YORK…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Dec 30, 1999

Citations

267 A.D.2d 1037 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
700 N.Y.S.2d 782

Citing Cases

In re Oneonta Water St. v. State Liq. Auth

These dismissals were sustained by respondent. Upon our review of the record, we are eminently satisfied that…

Murray v. Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control

Respondent determined that petitioner failed to sustain his burden of proving that affirmative defense with…