Opinion
February 21, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Boehm, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Denman, Boomer, O'Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: We find no proof that respondents unlawfully sold or unlawfully assisted in the procurement of liquor by the intoxicated person which would support a violation of the Dram Shop Act (General Obligations Law § 11-101). The proof demonstrated mere consumption by Guli. The Dram Shop Act must be construed narrowly (Gabrielle v Craft, 75 A.D.2d 939) and absent proof of any sales of intoxicating beverages to Guli or other evidence that respondents did unlawfully assist "in procuring liquor for [such] intoxicated person", summary judgment was properly granted (Wright v. Sunset Recreation, 91 A.D.2d 701).